WEBVTT 00:00:07.240 --> 00:00:07.830 Good morning. 00:00:09.439 --> 00:00:13.179 Good to see everyone here this morning. Um, before 00:00:13.179 --> 00:00:17.399 we take up commission business, I'd like us to ask 00:00:17.399 --> 00:00:21.050 everyone to pause and take a moment of silence for 00:00:21.050 --> 00:00:24.489 our fellow Texans who were victims of the tragedy in 00:00:24.489 --> 00:00:26.050 Uvalde this week. 00:00:39.039 --> 00:00:40.979 Mm hmm. Yeah, 00:00:48.340 --> 00:00:48.850 thank you. 00:00:51.200 --> 00:00:53.259 This meeting of the Public Utility Commission of texas 00:00:53.259 --> 00:00:55.020 will come to order to consider matters that have been 00:00:55.020 --> 00:00:58.229 duly posted with the Secretary of State of texas from 00:00:58.229 --> 00:01:01.420 May 26th 2022. For the record. My name is Peter Lake 00:01:01.420 --> 00:01:04.689 and with me today or Will Mcadams and Lori Cobos Commissioner 00:01:04.689 --> 00:01:08.019 Gladfelter is unable to join us today Due 00:01:08.019 --> 00:01:11.620 to COVID 19. And just to make sure we dot our I's 00:01:11.620 --> 00:01:14.640 and cross our Ts Id like to entertain a motion 00:01:14.640 --> 00:01:15.829 to excuse his absence. 00:01:17.530 --> 00:01:19.230 2nd, all in favor say Aye, 00:01:20.890 --> 00:01:22.359 opposed motion passes 00:01:24.040 --> 00:01:27.159 Mr. Journeay you please walk us through the consent items 00:01:27.159 --> 00:01:30.760 on today's agenda? Good morning Commissioners by individual 00:01:30.760 --> 00:01:33.359 following items were placed on the consent agenda 00:01:33.739 --> 00:01:41.480 4, 6, 8, 9 ,10, 11, 12, 19, 20 and 21. We have a motion to 00:01:41.480 --> 00:01:44.680 approve the items just described by Mr. Journeay? 2nd 00:01:44.689 --> 00:01:49.260 all in favor say Aye. None opposed motion passes 00:01:50.239 --> 00:01:53.760 (item:1) Item # one, Please sir. Item # one is public comment 00:01:53.760 --> 00:01:55.250 and no one has signed up on the list sir. 00:01:57.939 --> 00:02:00.939 Thank you. given we have no public comment today. Public 00:02:00.939 --> 00:02:05.230 comment portion of our agenda is now closed. Next 00:02:05.230 --> 00:02:09.590 (item:2) item please, item two is docked at 51091 is the complaint 00:02:09.599 --> 00:02:13.060 of certain members of the RIO. Entre homeowners Association 00:02:13.539 --> 00:02:16.569 and David and Doreen Myers against aqua texas. The 00:02:16.580 --> 00:02:20.169 PFD was filed on january 7th and the L. J. Made no 00:02:20.169 --> 00:02:23.979 changes in response to exceptions. The commission previously 00:02:23.979 --> 00:02:28.050 considered the PhD at the March 10 meeting. We've seen 00:02:28.050 --> 00:02:34.180 this before. Thank you. Thoughts come to. Um Well, 00:02:34.180 --> 00:02:39.860 well sir, just to boil it down, set the table. Um The 00:02:39.860 --> 00:02:43.250 complaint alleges that aqua failed to provide continuous 00:02:43.250 --> 00:02:46.919 and adequate service. So in my view that assertion 00:02:46.919 --> 00:02:50.939 hinges on a determination of reasonable and local demand 00:02:50.939 --> 00:02:53.770 characteristics because again, if you have a high consumption 00:02:53.770 --> 00:02:58.020 user in an area um and you're trying to determine, 00:02:58.030 --> 00:02:58.960 okay, what 00:03:00.639 --> 00:03:03.379 I mean are they allowed to drain lake Travis kind of 00:03:03.379 --> 00:03:07.419 thing or whatever their their water sources. The commission 00:03:07.430 --> 00:03:11.250 has only this metric to sort of lean on to determine 00:03:11.259 --> 00:03:15.099 um what is reasonable and then it gets down to okay 00:03:15.099 --> 00:03:18.270 who needs to provide that evidence and how are we to 00:03:18.280 --> 00:03:23.360 weigh the facts. Um What makes this more interesting 00:03:23.360 --> 00:03:26.639 is Aqua has consolidated the subdivision into a larger 00:03:26.639 --> 00:03:31.569 pool. And so that definition of of reasonable local 00:03:31.569 --> 00:03:35.030 demand characteristics becomes more muddy and less 00:03:35.030 --> 00:03:42.860 clear. Um That was a bad water pun. But um so when 00:03:42.860 --> 00:03:45.960 evaluating what are we to base our decision on, 00:03:47.939 --> 00:03:53.860 I believe that we don't have enough evidence from the 00:03:53.900 --> 00:03:59.000 complainant to determine um what the standard is as 00:03:59.000 --> 00:04:02.060 applied to reasonable local demand characteristics 00:04:02.639 --> 00:04:06.750 and as such. Um And I'm open to hearing other discussions 00:04:07.340 --> 00:04:14.360 but I'm um for adopting in part and rejecting in part 00:04:14.360 --> 00:04:19.259 the PFD um to establish a claim that Aqua failed to 00:04:19.259 --> 00:04:21.819 provide a continuous inadequate supply. There must 00:04:21.829 --> 00:04:24.790 be sufficient evidence on the record for the commission 00:04:24.790 --> 00:04:27.389 to identify a reasonable local demand characteristics 00:04:27.399 --> 00:04:30.740 of a service area and determine the capacity necessary 00:04:30.740 --> 00:04:35.740 to meet those that need. Um The complainants in my 00:04:35.740 --> 00:04:38.500 view failed to show Aqua is providing insufficient 00:04:38.500 --> 00:04:40.949 capacity because they did not establish what was the 00:04:40.949 --> 00:04:43.389 reasonable and local demand characteristics for their 00:04:43.389 --> 00:04:50.920 own system. So I would move to reject reject the, so 00:04:50.920 --> 00:04:55.019 a L. G A L. J. Stated legal standard for inadequate 00:04:55.019 --> 00:04:58.089 capacity claims and deny the insufficient capacity 00:04:58.089 --> 00:05:01.920 claims due to the complaints, failure to present sufficient 00:05:01.920 --> 00:05:04.560 evidence for the commission to make a qualitative or 00:05:04.560 --> 00:05:07.720 quantitative determination of reasonable and local 00:05:07.720 --> 00:05:10.649 demand characteristics of the Rio Ancho subdivision 00:05:11.839 --> 00:05:16.100 Um and so that that brings us to another topic. Did 00:05:16.100 --> 00:05:19.149 the complaints show Aqua tex has imposed water use 00:05:19.149 --> 00:05:22.569 restrictions in lieu of providing sufficient capacity 00:05:22.569 --> 00:05:26.009 to meet the Rio Ancho water systems reasonable local 00:05:26.009 --> 00:05:30.430 demand characteristics during normal use periods. Um 00:05:30.490 --> 00:05:35.639 I believe no the complaints didn't show that aqua texas 00:05:35.639 --> 00:05:37.699 imposed water use restrictions in lieu of providing 00:05:37.699 --> 00:05:40.569 sufficient capacity to meet their needs, their their 00:05:40.569 --> 00:05:44.649 demand characteristics during normal use periods. Um 00:05:46.639 --> 00:05:51.199 And so with that Mr Chairman, I I stand on the motion 00:05:51.639 --> 00:05:54.069 Okay, covered a lot there. Thank you sir. 00:05:56.079 --> 00:06:01.379 Sure I am in agreement as well that um with with adopting 00:06:01.379 --> 00:06:04.379 the PFD in part and rejecting it in part I think um 00:06:04.389 --> 00:06:06.750 with respect to the burden of proof, I think we have 00:06:06.750 --> 00:06:09.910 to take it a step back just a bit in terms of 00:06:09.920 --> 00:06:12.800 the commission's rules don't define what reasonable 00:06:12.800 --> 00:06:17.000 local demand characteristics are or set forth any criteria 00:06:17.000 --> 00:06:20.100 factors to help us determine what reasonable local 00:06:20.100 --> 00:06:23.560 demand characteristics are. And so we're left with 00:06:23.839 --> 00:06:27.079 you know, setting precedent in this case as to what 00:06:27.089 --> 00:06:29.329 you know, reasonable local demand characteristics are 00:06:29.329 --> 00:06:32.079 And the the complainants have not provided sufficient 00:06:32.089 --> 00:06:37.259 evidence to help us come to such a determination and 00:06:37.259 --> 00:06:40.470 therefore have um failed to meet their burden of proof 00:06:40.480 --> 00:06:47.639 that they have in this case. And so uh they so you 00:06:47.639 --> 00:06:52.600 know I would reject the PFD with respect to failure 00:06:52.600 --> 00:06:57.589 to me burden of proof. Um and also um you know the 00:06:57.589 --> 00:06:59.839 application of the incorrect legal standard that sell 00:06:59.839 --> 00:07:05.230 a used that they relied on actual um demand characteristics 00:07:05.230 --> 00:07:09.160 And as Commissioner Mcadams laid out, you have to identify 00:07:09.160 --> 00:07:12.579 the reasonable local demand characteristics and then 00:07:12.589 --> 00:07:16.910 um determine whether sufficient capacity has been provided 00:07:16.910 --> 00:07:19.759 to meet the reasonable local characteristics. I think 00:07:19.759 --> 00:07:22.180 that's that's how I get to the point of the denial 00:07:22.180 --> 00:07:26.350 part of the soul PFD. And then with respect to the 00:07:26.350 --> 00:07:30.720 approval aspect um I agree that the water use restrictions 00:07:30.730 --> 00:07:36.350 um in the company's drought contingency plan were followed 00:07:36.350 --> 00:07:38.610 there was drought in place during this entire time 00:07:38.610 --> 00:07:40.649 of the case and and so I don't think there was any 00:07:40.649 --> 00:07:44.160 violation there, so I would approve the so uh a LJ's 00:07:44.160 --> 00:07:49.759 recommendation on on that issue agreed. It sounds like 00:07:49.759 --> 00:07:52.689 your perspective is consistent with the motion Commissioner 00:07:52.689 --> 00:07:55.160 Mcadams laid out. All right. 00:07:57.980 --> 00:08:01.279 All right. We have a second second. All in favor say 00:08:01.279 --> 00:08:01.550 aye, 00:08:03.339 --> 00:08:08.279 unopposed motion passes Stephen. Do we need to clean 00:08:08.279 --> 00:08:10.959 that up? Are you all good on that? Well, I think your 00:08:10.959 --> 00:08:13.569 emotions clear sir. Um there was one statement made 00:08:13.569 --> 00:08:16.649 that was I heard maybe a little inconsistent but we're 00:08:16.649 --> 00:08:18.350 standing on your motion. So I think 00:08:21.040 --> 00:08:21.550 all right, 00:08:32.039 --> 00:08:37.029 (item:3)next time please item three is docket 51233. It's 00:08:37.029 --> 00:08:39.590 a complaint of john sills foods against Southern utilities 00:08:39.590 --> 00:08:42.960 company. A proposed order was filed on May 6th. 00:08:45.639 --> 00:08:49.049 This is certainly an interesting approach on it, tariff 00:08:49.049 --> 00:08:53.850 alteration. Any any thoughts or comments. Well, I think 00:08:53.850 --> 00:08:56.960 you hit the nail on the head. Mr. Chairman. Um Look 00:08:57.340 --> 00:09:01.950 basic facts. Ah This commission has never approved 00:09:01.950 --> 00:09:04.980 a tariff for this utility. The states all the way back 00:09:04.980 --> 00:09:09.039 to 2014 prior to the migration of the water water over 00:09:09.039 --> 00:09:14.179 to the puc. So I think that that that is meaningful 00:09:14.200 --> 00:09:17.330 in this situation. I also believe that the ultimate 00:09:17.330 --> 00:09:23.259 impact of um of the settlement is to alter the tariff 00:09:24.139 --> 00:09:28.200 under law. I don't think you can do that at least in 00:09:28.200 --> 00:09:31.320 my view. Um So 00:09:32.840 --> 00:09:34.820 I believe the commission should reject the proposed 00:09:34.820 --> 00:09:38.309 order and remand the proceeding to sell it. Um and 00:09:38.309 --> 00:09:40.720 for the following reasons. Under the proposed order 00:09:40.730 --> 00:09:45.809 order, southern utilities would pay $1.5 million John 00:09:45.809 --> 00:09:49.129 Souls Foods. So the proposed order would also allow 00:09:49.129 --> 00:09:52.929 southern utilities to deposit an additional $740,000 00:09:52.929 --> 00:09:55.659 into the escrow account for further capital improvements 00:09:56.740 --> 00:09:59.590 In my view, it's not appropriate at this time to refund 00:09:59.590 --> 00:10:04.590 $1.5 million southern utilities to spend any additional 00:10:04.590 --> 00:10:09.669 escrow funds. Southern filings in docket number 4464 00:10:09.669 --> 00:10:13.289 reflect that it has collected $12.8 million dollars 00:10:13.299 --> 00:10:17.019 through this surcharge. So the proposed order refunds 00:10:17.019 --> 00:10:20.120 $1.5 million but does not address whether the rest 00:10:20.120 --> 00:10:24.600 of the 12.8 million was properly spent. The commission 00:10:24.610 --> 00:10:27.220 referred this complaint to so to find out whether this 00:10:27.220 --> 00:10:30.750 money was misused and instead the proposed order improperly 00:10:30.750 --> 00:10:34.080 pays out a refund to one ratepayer and authorizes more 00:10:34.080 --> 00:10:36.450 expenditures without addressing issues that affect 00:10:36.460 --> 00:10:42.110 all of the Southern's ratepayers. Um I believe that 00:10:42.110 --> 00:10:46.450 is a big problem. Um Now as to the surcharge the determination 00:10:46.450 --> 00:10:49.350 of the conservation surcharges also improper in this 00:10:49.350 --> 00:10:52.169 proceeding. In my view, Southern's tariffs require 00:10:52.169 --> 00:10:55.480 it to collect the conservation surcharge but the commission 00:10:55.480 --> 00:10:58.149 cannot cease its collection in a complaint proceeding 00:10:58.840 --> 00:11:02.370 Therefore the improper use the sofa, LJ's correctly 00:11:02.370 --> 00:11:04.789 froze withdrawal of the surcharge money from the escrow 00:11:04.789 --> 00:11:08.620 account While withdrawal requires commission approval 00:11:08.620 --> 00:11:13.950 under 16 Tac 24 .39. Subsection b. subsection three 00:11:14.440 --> 00:11:18.159 um The interim relief in that case is appropriate. 00:11:18.539 --> 00:11:21.720 Yeah but the so A L. J. Has also stopped collection 00:11:21.720 --> 00:11:24.750 of the surcharge that is not appropriate in this proceeding 00:11:25.539 --> 00:11:30.190 under 16 Tac 24.39. Subsection B. Subsection two. The 00:11:30.190 --> 00:11:32.940 commission may suspend the collection of surcharge 00:11:32.940 --> 00:11:36.309 revenues after the commission identifies a deficiency 00:11:36.320 --> 00:11:39.700 in escrow agreement and after the utility fails to 00:11:39.700 --> 00:11:42.799 remedy that deficiency. So the commission has not yet 00:11:42.799 --> 00:11:46.509 identified a deficiency in the escrow agreement. I 00:11:46.509 --> 00:11:48.690 believe we should correct. Direct commission staff 00:11:48.690 --> 00:11:51.080 to address whether the escrow agreement is in fact 00:11:51.080 --> 00:11:53.809 deficient. And when this proceeding comes back to us 00:11:53.809 --> 00:11:56.139 we should consider bringing southern utilities in for 00:11:56.139 --> 00:12:00.500 a rate proceeding at that time. Mhm. So given all that 00:12:00.500 --> 00:12:03.690 Mr Chairman I have a motion that would package that 00:12:03.700 --> 00:12:08.929 together um but certainly open to hold that. 00:12:11.860 --> 00:12:15.919 I mean I generally agree. I think some of the issues 00:12:15.919 --> 00:12:19.919 that have arisen in this case are not appropriate for 00:12:19.919 --> 00:12:22.080 this type of complaint case. They're more appropriate 00:12:22.080 --> 00:12:25.720 in the rate making proceeding. Um You know that the 00:12:25.720 --> 00:12:27.899 settlement will essentially get rid of a surcharge 00:12:27.909 --> 00:12:32.580 that is part of a tariff. Um It is in many ways 00:12:32.610 --> 00:12:37.129 kind of this is a settlement. That's that's in a vacuum 00:12:37.139 --> 00:12:39.090 where you're not taking in consideration the other 00:12:39.090 --> 00:12:44.850 impacted customers. And so um I think generally speaking 00:12:45.340 --> 00:12:47.629 you know, we have to determine, you know, what the 00:12:47.629 --> 00:12:50.889 impacts are for the other customers. Um and you know 00:12:50.899 --> 00:12:54.419 I know the this large consumer has entered into a very 00:12:54.419 --> 00:12:58.289 favorable settlement agreement for themselves, but 00:12:58.299 --> 00:13:02.460 we must look at this more broadly and um generally 00:13:02.470 --> 00:13:04.740 agree with your statement with respect to you know 00:13:04.740 --> 00:13:06.960 southern utilities class a utility. There are large 00:13:06.960 --> 00:13:09.360 utility. They their last rate case was several years 00:13:09.360 --> 00:13:14.110 ago at TC Q. And um there are issues with the tariff 00:13:14.120 --> 00:13:17.059 um in in any rate related matters that they need to 00:13:17.059 --> 00:13:19.250 come into the commission for a rate case and we can 00:13:19.250 --> 00:13:22.769 address these issues but um sort of these and ad hoc 00:13:22.769 --> 00:13:26.720 settlement agreement um related to rate making principles 00:13:26.720 --> 00:13:30.490 and and surcharges uh and tariffs is just not the appropriate 00:13:30.490 --> 00:13:32.950 forum. So I I would agree with Commissioner Mcadams 00:13:32.950 --> 00:13:36.720 on rejecting the proposed order that adopts a settlement 00:13:36.720 --> 00:13:39.799 agreement and remanded the case back so that the remaining 00:13:39.809 --> 00:13:42.710 issues in the preliminary order can be addressed. And 00:13:42.720 --> 00:13:45.539 um and then you probably laid him out. But whether 00:13:45.850 --> 00:13:48.899 the Conservation churchyards to address including the 00:13:48.899 --> 00:13:51.639 conservation surcharge amounts collected from the ratepayers 00:13:52.340 --> 00:13:54.830 whether the conservation surcharge funds were used 00:13:54.830 --> 00:13:57.059 for infrastructure capacity improvements to satisfy 00:13:57.059 --> 00:14:00.669 high demand and whether those uses were properly authorized 00:14:00.679 --> 00:14:04.059 Additionally after noticing hearing the LJ should examine 00:14:04.440 --> 00:14:07.629 or determine whether the company's conservation surcharge 00:14:07.629 --> 00:14:11.059 was unreasonable or in any way violated any law. So 00:14:11.539 --> 00:14:13.690 that's that's the way I would frame what needs to be 00:14:13.690 --> 00:14:18.179 addressed still. But I will let um I will let you Commissioner 00:14:18.179 --> 00:14:20.419 mike Adams lay out your motion but that's I think were 00:14:20.419 --> 00:14:25.429 generally on the same page agree on all points especially 00:14:25.429 --> 00:14:29.669 your point about using these funds for things like 00:14:29.740 --> 00:14:31.559 tax liability instead of infrastructure. 00:14:33.539 --> 00:14:36.610 You still got that motion. I got loaded. Alright far 00:14:36.610 --> 00:14:40.139 away. Uh I would move that the commission remained 00:14:40.139 --> 00:14:42.450 this proceeding to so to address the remaining issues 00:14:42.450 --> 00:14:45.320 identified in the commission's preliminary order including 00:14:45.320 --> 00:14:48.090 the amount of money collected from ratepayers, whether 00:14:48.090 --> 00:14:50.720 the conservation surcharge funds were used for the 00:14:50.720 --> 00:14:53.789 proper infrastructure improvements and whether those 00:14:53.789 --> 00:14:57.250 uses were properly preauthorized. The commission should 00:14:57.250 --> 00:14:59.559 direct southern companies to resume collection of the 00:14:59.559 --> 00:15:03.450 surcharge in accordance with its tariff. Uh And the 00:15:03.450 --> 00:15:06.210 commission should direct commission staff to address 00:15:06.210 --> 00:15:09.909 deficiencies in the escrow agreement. Uh so that the 00:15:09.909 --> 00:15:12.399 commission can determine whether a rate proceeding 00:15:12.409 --> 00:15:16.610 to eliminate the surcharge is appropriate. Got it, 00:15:16.610 --> 00:15:20.659 do we have a 2nd 2nd? All in favor say aye. None 00:15:20.659 --> 00:15:24.480 opposed motion passes nicely done. Thank you both brings 00:15:24.480 --> 00:15:26.970 us to item number five please. Mr 00:15:29.340 --> 00:15:29.549 mhm 00:15:31.740 --> 00:15:35.009 (item: 5) item five is docket 52137. It's the application 00:15:35.009 --> 00:15:38.870 city of Galveston's to amended CCN uh In Galveston 00:15:38.870 --> 00:15:41.990 county proposed order was filed on february 18th and 00:15:41.990 --> 00:15:44.990 the judge filed a correction memo on March 7th. I also 00:15:44.990 --> 00:15:48.409 have a memo with proposed changes to the order. Thank 00:15:48.409 --> 00:15:54.429 you sir. This is another CCN comments. Yeah. In my 00:15:54.429 --> 00:15:57.039 view Mr. Chairman, this lined up very similarly to 00:15:57.039 --> 00:16:00.200 what we recently considered as part of the SAN Marcus 00:16:00.210 --> 00:16:05.120 uh proceeding However, one difference stood out to 00:16:05.120 --> 00:16:11.990 me. Um the requested CCN uh territory fits wholly within 00:16:12.000 --> 00:16:18.129 the municipal boundaries of gallstone. Yeah, I'm sorry 00:16:18.129 --> 00:16:22.570 to say that on the transcript but no that that's it 00:16:22.580 --> 00:16:29.259 Um So I like the revised order. I'm in agreement. I 00:16:29.259 --> 00:16:32.669 think that um the fact that the requested service area 00:16:32.679 --> 00:16:35.559 for both both water and sewer service are within the 00:16:35.570 --> 00:16:38.570 city of Galveston's um municipal boundaries is a key 00:16:38.570 --> 00:16:42.360 difference. Um It as I have read um the information 00:16:42.360 --> 00:16:46.269 in this case, it it um it appears that our past commission 00:16:46.269 --> 00:16:50.899 president has been focused on allowing the city to 00:16:50.909 --> 00:16:54.200 um add requested area to their CCN that's within their 00:16:54.200 --> 00:16:56.710 boundaries and I think some important facts in this 00:16:56.710 --> 00:16:59.809 case are that Galveston's already serving Um the customers 00:16:59.809 --> 00:17:04.380 in that area there serving 5,167 customers um in the 00:17:04.380 --> 00:17:10.640 area. And so I think in this case um it would be 00:17:10.650 --> 00:17:14.650 um prudent to just move forward and adopt the proposed 00:17:14.650 --> 00:17:18.420 order that approves the CCN amendment. Um As if if 00:17:18.420 --> 00:17:21.240 we just give them just the slight portions that they 00:17:21.240 --> 00:17:23.829 don't cover and sewer, they'll be back in and we avoid 00:17:23.839 --> 00:17:26.339 they'll have to come back in and then they're CCN and 00:17:26.339 --> 00:17:28.660 by just going ahead and getting it all in the requested 00:17:28.660 --> 00:17:32.140 area right now we avoid ongoing litigation and and 00:17:32.150 --> 00:17:35.779 rate payer costs so you do it consistent with commission 00:17:35.779 --> 00:17:39.950 counsel memo? Yes. Dot there changes as well. Sounds 00:17:39.950 --> 00:17:44.430 dangerously close to a motion. Alright. I'll move to 00:17:44.440 --> 00:17:46.950 approve the revised proposed order amending the city 00:17:46.950 --> 00:17:49.369 of Galveston's CCN for the water and sewer service 00:17:49.369 --> 00:17:53.660 in Galveston County to include the entire 15,000, 897 00:17:53.660 --> 00:17:56.440 acre requested area with changes proposed in commission 00:17:56.440 --> 00:18:00.450 counsel's memo and the A. L. J's correction memo would 00:18:00.450 --> 00:18:03.220 second that motion the second all in favor say, aye 00:18:03.230 --> 00:18:08.319 aye, none opposed motion passes. Next item police sir 00:18:08.430 --> 00:18:13.279 (item:7) item seven is docket 52534 petition of central frisco 00:18:13.279 --> 00:18:16.849 limited to amend merrily Special utility district CCN 00:18:16.859 --> 00:18:21.000 in collin county by expedited release. A proposed order 00:18:21.000 --> 00:18:23.720 was filed on February 16 and the Judge filed a correction 00:18:23.720 --> 00:18:27.700 memo on March one. Thank you Sir. Thoughts comments 00:18:27.700 --> 00:18:33.680 on this CCN. Well 450 acres in the utility and central 00:18:33.680 --> 00:18:38.700 Frisco's requesting release of 197 acres. Significant 00:18:38.710 --> 00:18:41.980 Um, other facts we've never granted a release with 00:18:41.980 --> 00:18:46.769 active meters. Um, and again, the utility has to maintain 00:18:46.779 --> 00:18:51.589 capacity to active or inactive meters. Um, meters under 00:18:51.589 --> 00:18:54.950 the crystal clear standard are committed if it provides 00:18:54.950 --> 00:18:58.049 service to attractive land. So, um, 00:18:59.640 --> 00:19:03.130 I've got a problem with with granting that based on 00:19:03.140 --> 00:19:08.390 the inactive meters in this territory. Mm hmm. Yes 00:19:08.390 --> 00:19:14.410 sir. There is a concern uh similar concerns I think 00:19:14.420 --> 00:19:17.779 Um we would benefit from remanding the case back for 00:19:17.779 --> 00:19:21.069 further processing um to give the petitioner an opportunity 00:19:21.069 --> 00:19:25.369 to amend um their petition to exclude or address the 00:19:25.369 --> 00:19:27.619 dead or inactive meters from the track of land that 00:19:27.619 --> 00:19:28.769 they're seeking to be released. 00:19:30.700 --> 00:19:33.789 otherwise it seems in good shape. Those two m need 00:19:33.789 --> 00:19:38.690 to be carved out because they are can be active consistent 00:19:38.690 --> 00:19:41.940 with our past practices were not restarting them at 00:19:41.950 --> 00:19:45.839 Square one. We're trying to let them amend it to get 00:19:45.839 --> 00:19:47.940 it in in shape to where we could actually approve it 00:19:47.950 --> 00:19:50.240 Absolutely. It's important that we stay consistent 00:19:50.240 --> 00:19:53.049 on these expedited release cases. Right? 00:19:55.720 --> 00:19:58.269 Yes. I'd be happy to make motion so I would make a 00:19:58.269 --> 00:20:01.779 motion to remand the case back for further processing 00:20:01.779 --> 00:20:04.059 to give the petition an opportunity to mend its petition 00:20:04.539 --> 00:20:09.180 um to address the dead and inactive meters um that 00:20:09.180 --> 00:20:13.150 they're seeking to remove from the track of land. And 00:20:13.150 --> 00:20:15.450 I would second motion in a second all in favor say 00:20:15.450 --> 00:20:18.220 aye, not opposed motion passes. 00:20:20.039 --> 00:20:22.849 (item:13)Which brings us to item 13. 00:20:25.960 --> 00:20:26.480 Excuse me. 00:20:28.730 --> 00:20:32.529 Did I Miss 1? I'm sorry, I didn't mark it on my 00:20:33.500 --> 00:20:34.339 my 00:20:38.240 --> 00:20:42.519 We'll go to item 13. Nothing on that one. Which brings 00:20:42.519 --> 00:20:45.549 (item:14) us to item 14. 00:20:47.140 --> 00:20:51.769 Item 14 is dog at 5 to 163 is the application of 00:20:51.769 --> 00:20:56.380 the incumbent local exchange carrier. Members of texas 00:20:56.380 --> 00:20:59.109 statewide Telephone cooperative and the texas Telephone 00:20:59.109 --> 00:21:02.210 association for approval of revisions to the generic 00:21:02.220 --> 00:21:05.740 intro state access services tariff proposed order was 00:21:05.740 --> 00:21:08.880 filed on March 14th and the judge recommended no changes 00:21:08.880 --> 00:21:10.460 in response to exceptions. 00:21:12.140 --> 00:21:13.640 There's a lot going on here. 00:21:15.440 --> 00:21:19.490 Anybody want to take the first bite out? Well 00:21:21.039 --> 00:21:24.769 look since since we we all came in together since this 00:21:24.769 --> 00:21:28.210 commission has been comprised, we've been trying to 00:21:28.220 --> 00:21:32.630 move towards a pro form of tariff. Um in my view this 00:21:32.630 --> 00:21:34.960 would take another step formalizing that 00:21:36.940 --> 00:21:43.819 and look as such that approved the proposed. I believe 00:21:43.819 --> 00:21:46.509 we should approve the proposed revisions to the generic 00:21:46.509 --> 00:21:50.630 tariff uh in the interest of you know, Setting one 00:21:50.630 --> 00:21:54.170 More block in the wall that that might allow us to 00:21:54.839 --> 00:21:58.640 to adopt pro former. Um Additionally, I believe there 00:21:58.640 --> 00:22:02.059 is good cause for an exemption um to the commission 00:22:02.059 --> 00:22:05.960 requirements for 16 to 26 2 oh five. Subsection B. 00:22:08.539 --> 00:22:12.950 I I do believe that the commission should delete ordering 00:22:12.950 --> 00:22:17.440 paragraph number four um and take no further action 00:22:17.609 --> 00:22:20.460 in this docket on it. Um 00:22:22.039 --> 00:22:24.900 But on the whole the commission should approve the 00:22:24.910 --> 00:22:28.269 proposed order with modifications Delete paragraph 00:22:28.269 --> 00:22:30.660 four. Yes, sir, ordering paragraph number four and 00:22:30.660 --> 00:22:31.450 that's the modification. 00:22:33.240 --> 00:22:37.619 Otherwise adopt the proposed order. Yes I'm I'm in 00:22:37.619 --> 00:22:41.259 general agreement as well um with respect to approving 00:22:41.259 --> 00:22:44.940 the proposed order. Um that would essentially approve 00:22:44.940 --> 00:22:48.440 the proposed changes to the generic tariff. Um and 00:22:48.450 --> 00:22:51.029 making the changes their deletion to ordering paragraph 00:22:51.029 --> 00:22:54.809 number four. And I would also add to direct commissions 00:22:54.809 --> 00:22:57.410 to have to open a rulemaking project to work with the 00:22:57.410 --> 00:23:00.619 stakeholders to develop the Proforma um interstate 00:23:00.630 --> 00:23:05.509 access tariffs that the companies would use to um file 00:23:05.509 --> 00:23:09.099 their own individual tariffs. So we understand I like 00:23:09.099 --> 00:23:12.950 that idea, but it's perfect for rulemaking one of many 00:23:13.339 --> 00:23:17.769 that we have. Yeah, well I guess we were cool crawl 00:23:17.769 --> 00:23:19.759 before we walk. So what I'm hearing you say is you 00:23:19.759 --> 00:23:25.130 want to open a project to get to start the foundation 00:23:25.130 --> 00:23:28.519 of establishing like it's the next spirit, more bricks 00:23:28.519 --> 00:23:33.500 in the wall. Uh moving forward and ask the Alex to 00:23:33.500 --> 00:23:37.109 submit their thoughts on what should that pro former 00:23:37.670 --> 00:23:40.819 Yes, yes. And I think having a performer tariff would 00:23:40.819 --> 00:23:45.099 be um an efficient way of moving forward. Um and also 00:23:45.109 --> 00:23:47.440 help with our internal staff resources, so we have 00:23:47.440 --> 00:23:50.220 one tariff in place that the individual companies can 00:23:50.220 --> 00:23:55.259 then use for filing at the commission agreed on all 00:23:55.259 --> 00:23:56.950 points because staff needs, 00:23:58.539 --> 00:23:59.339 do we know 00:24:01.539 --> 00:24:05.690 do you need any more direction from the staff perspective 00:24:05.690 --> 00:24:06.160 on 00:24:08.240 --> 00:24:11.269 sounds like we're opening a project and looking into 00:24:11.839 --> 00:24:15.769 making a pro former tariff, understood and will request 00:24:16.240 --> 00:24:20.609 Alex themselves to submit their thoughts on how that 00:24:20.619 --> 00:24:24.339 protest, we hear you and we will do it. Thank you Mr 00:24:24.339 --> 00:24:29.859 Smeltzer. Other than that when hearing is we have we 00:24:30.640 --> 00:24:33.900 I agree that we want to delete the ordering paragraph 00:24:33.900 --> 00:24:37.190 for but otherwise approve the proposed order. 00:24:38.839 --> 00:24:42.410 Second motion and a second all in favor say aye, aye 00:24:42.690 --> 00:24:45.029 not opposed motion passes 00:24:46.839 --> 00:24:51.089 (item:16) nothing on 15 which brings us to item number 16 mister 00:24:51.309 --> 00:24:55.559 please, items 16 is docked at 5 to 455 best application 00:24:55.559 --> 00:25:02.509 of encore two minutes ccn for old country switched 00:25:02.509 --> 00:25:06.000 3 45 KB tap transmission line in Ellis County proposed 00:25:06.000 --> 00:25:09.160 order was filed on may 6th and a correction memo was 00:25:09.160 --> 00:25:12.529 filed on May 17th. I also have a memo with proposed 00:25:12.529 --> 00:25:13.650 changes to the order. 00:25:24.240 --> 00:25:28.359 All right, routing routing docket. These are never 00:25:28.359 --> 00:25:33.930 easy but unfortunately I guess for better or worse 00:25:34.539 --> 00:25:38.809 we've got all parties agreed on a route in this case 00:25:38.809 --> 00:25:40.960 but there seems to be a cost issue, correct 00:25:43.140 --> 00:25:47.309 thoughts, comments um Yes, so man, I was hoping you'd 00:25:47.309 --> 00:25:51.640 have comments on this. Well, thank you, I have some 00:25:51.640 --> 00:25:55.579 comments and so certainly you know, appreciate the 00:25:55.579 --> 00:25:59.039 parties working towards coming to a settlement um in 00:25:59.039 --> 00:26:02.799 this case I think you know this this cases is different 00:26:02.799 --> 00:26:05.289 from other cases that we've addressed recently with 00:26:05.289 --> 00:26:07.720 respect to settlement agreements with a little bit 00:26:07.720 --> 00:26:12.839 more um costly settlement routes and I think in prior 00:26:12.839 --> 00:26:17.529 cases we have received more information to help support 00:26:17.529 --> 00:26:19.869 the settlement agreement um so that we can properly 00:26:19.869 --> 00:26:22.420 evaluate whether the cost is is something that we're 00:26:22.420 --> 00:26:26.410 willing to um approve um as we compare that to the 00:26:26.410 --> 00:26:28.740 reliability benefits that the new infrastructure would 00:26:28.740 --> 00:26:32.579 provide in this case. Um it's my understanding that 00:26:32.589 --> 00:26:35.250 you know, there's been an unanimous uh settlement agreement 00:26:35.250 --> 00:26:39.369 has been filed but there is no supporting testimony 00:26:39.380 --> 00:26:42.359 um that has been filed by the parties to support the 00:26:42.359 --> 00:26:46.160 unanimous agreement? Um You know based on historical 00:26:46.160 --> 00:26:48.250 commission practice. Usually when there are settlement 00:26:48.250 --> 00:26:51.640 agreements that are filed, there are there is a testimony 00:26:51.640 --> 00:26:55.009 that is appended to the settlement agreement to support 00:26:55.299 --> 00:26:59.539 the settlement. And so um from my position right now 00:26:59.539 --> 00:27:05.240 I would um like to um remand the case back to docket 00:27:05.240 --> 00:27:07.299 management for further processing so that the parties 00:27:07.299 --> 00:27:09.690 can file testimony to support the settlement agreement 00:27:09.690 --> 00:27:12.569 so that we can properly evaluate the settlement agreement 00:27:12.569 --> 00:27:16.480 before Um we decide whether we want to go with Route 00:27:16.480 --> 00:27:18.460 150 to the agreed route 00:27:20.160 --> 00:27:25.490 To justify the 20% cost increase. Yes. Okay so you 00:27:25.490 --> 00:27:27.890 would remanded back to who remanded back to docket 00:27:27.890 --> 00:27:32.079 management or or you know, is that the proper venue 00:27:32.079 --> 00:27:35.000 for? Yes I figured so reminded back to document management 00:27:35.000 --> 00:27:37.849 so that the parties can file supporting testimony to 00:27:37.849 --> 00:27:40.960 the settlement agreement. So we can properly evaluate 00:27:40.970 --> 00:27:43.509 um the settlement agreement because at this time other 00:27:43.509 --> 00:27:46.400 than what's in the record and I know encore filed support 00:27:46.400 --> 00:27:51.970 for um Settlement or not rather route 50 for so we 00:27:51.970 --> 00:27:55.160 have information in the record for Route 54 as that 00:27:55.160 --> 00:27:58.460 was the route that encore submitted in their application 00:27:58.839 --> 00:28:02.390 But not for 1:52. Um we just had the settlement agreement 00:28:02.400 --> 00:28:04.660 So I think we would benefit from having additional 00:28:04.660 --> 00:28:06.940 information so that we can properly weigh cost and 00:28:06.940 --> 00:28:11.819 reliability in this case. Do we need, sorry? Mr do 00:28:11.819 --> 00:28:15.470 we need to walk through what information to be brought 00:28:15.470 --> 00:28:18.970 forward on that or would O. P. O. P. D. M. Under 00:28:18.970 --> 00:28:23.210 this remand have discretion to sort of glean what's 00:28:23.210 --> 00:28:27.099 needed. I think it would be helpful for you to express 00:28:27.099 --> 00:28:30.319 any concerns. You have what what I'm hearing from the 00:28:30.329 --> 00:28:35.450 commissioner copos and what I I tend to agree with 00:28:35.450 --> 00:28:38.710 is what we very much appreciate the settlement. The 00:28:38.710 --> 00:28:40.410 fact that there's a settlement parties that work towards 00:28:40.410 --> 00:28:45.029 a settlement Encores. Original route of 50 for to their 00:28:45.029 --> 00:28:52.160 credit was 20% cheaper than this one? Um And so if 00:28:52.160 --> 00:28:56.819 we're going to put the 20% cost increase on the ratepayers 00:28:57.740 --> 00:28:59.799 I think we need to need to know why that very well 00:28:59.799 --> 00:29:04.210 may be justified. We just can't I can't see it Anything 00:29:04.210 --> 00:29:07.990 else. That's that's that's my one question asked to 00:29:07.990 --> 00:29:11.160 help us justify the cost. Right? We know where encore 00:29:11.160 --> 00:29:15.799 started out? 20% cheaper. All right. Obviously don't 00:29:15.799 --> 00:29:19.509 know how the The nuances of the settlement negotiations 00:29:19.519 --> 00:29:21.500 But that that would be the primary question in my mind 00:29:21.670 --> 00:29:26.529 What is the justification for the 20% increase or or 00:29:26.529 --> 00:29:28.359 why why shouldn't we stick with the original 00:29:30.180 --> 00:29:33.410 agreed? I think that's a central issue in my mind as 00:29:33.410 --> 00:29:33.900 well. 00:29:35.740 --> 00:29:37.670 Is the cost issue the 20% increase. 00:29:39.240 --> 00:29:44.799 Mhm. There are multiple, multiple existing right away 00:29:44.799 --> 00:29:49.299 is major thoroughfares that can be utilized, which 00:29:49.309 --> 00:29:52.930 comes into play as well. So we're not going to utilize 00:29:52.930 --> 00:29:58.079 those or utilize them to a lesser extent. Why? Yeah 00:29:58.089 --> 00:30:00.329 and I think we we would benefit from getting this additional 00:30:00.329 --> 00:30:02.680 information so that again, we could properly evaluate 00:30:02.680 --> 00:30:05.630 the settlement agreement and ultimately, um our goal 00:30:05.630 --> 00:30:08.009 here is to, you know, obviously settlements are viewed 00:30:08.009 --> 00:30:10.720 favorably, but we must look at reliability and cost 00:30:10.730 --> 00:30:14.390 um and and also take into consideration that if we 00:30:14.400 --> 00:30:18.019 if we end up um ultimately rejecting the settlement 00:30:18.019 --> 00:30:20.000 that we have to push it back for a hearing or another 00:30:20.000 --> 00:30:23.069 settlement and that we may not get anything really 00:30:23.069 --> 00:30:26.690 different at the end of the day, um an ongoing, obviously 00:30:26.690 --> 00:30:30.930 litigation costs and repair costs. Well, we'll start 00:30:30.930 --> 00:30:33.539 with getting more information, but those are some backdrop 00:30:33.539 --> 00:30:35.809 issues will have taken consideration as we look at 00:30:35.819 --> 00:30:38.950 um the settlement as a whole with the testimony that 00:30:38.950 --> 00:30:45.069 will be submitted, Yep. So 100% agree cost, um right 00:30:45.069 --> 00:30:48.559 of way impact paralleling existing right aways deviation 00:30:48.559 --> 00:30:53.920 from past Commission President, you know, give us some 00:30:53.920 --> 00:30:55.859 justification for that for the evidentiary record, 00:30:57.140 --> 00:30:57.950 anything else 00:31:00.059 --> 00:31:03.900 this afternoon? All right, So it sounds like there's 00:31:03.900 --> 00:31:08.329 a motion clothing out there for the remain. There you 00:31:08.329 --> 00:31:12.269 go. Id. So move consistent with our discussion to remand 00:31:12.269 --> 00:31:13.769 the case to O. P. D. M 00:31:15.740 --> 00:31:17.960 in order. So the party should supplement the record 00:31:18.839 --> 00:31:21.430 interesting with you consistent with our discussion 00:31:21.720 --> 00:31:23.980 We've got a motion. Do we have a 2nd 2nd? All in 00:31:23.980 --> 00:31:27.059 favor of the motion Second, all in favor say, aye. 00:31:27.519 --> 00:31:33.250 None opposed motion passes thank you mm hmm. The next 00:31:33.259 --> 00:31:37.869 (item:17) item please. Mr item 17 is docked at 52709. Its 00:31:38.160 --> 00:31:42.029 compliance filing for doc at 5 to 3 to one, which was 00:31:42.039 --> 00:31:46.009 the ERCOT application for a debt obligation order under 00:31:46.009 --> 00:31:50.700 sub chapter end of chapter 39. Uh ERCOT filed a request 00:31:50.700 --> 00:31:53.740 seeking approval of his compliance filing and provided 00:31:53.750 --> 00:31:58.769 a proposed notice of approval recused from this item 00:31:58.769 --> 00:32:00.500 only the next one. So I'll turn it over to Commissioner 00:32:00.500 --> 00:32:02.049 Mcadams. Thanks sir. 00:32:03.839 --> 00:32:08.450 Okay. uh item number 17 docket number 5-709. You've 00:32:08.450 --> 00:32:10.680 laid that out? I believe that's what I heard while 00:32:10.680 --> 00:32:14.220 we were shuffling papers around. Thank you. Um this 00:32:14.220 --> 00:32:16.789 is a request from ERCOT for an order confirming that 00:32:16.789 --> 00:32:22.029 it's true of filing filed on may 12th 2020 2020 22 00:32:22.039 --> 00:32:24.849 complies with pura and the commission's debt obligation 00:32:24.849 --> 00:32:28.430 order in docket number 5 to 3 to one Commissioner. 00:32:28.430 --> 00:32:32.619 Do you have any thoughts from my perspective and review 00:32:32.619 --> 00:32:36.390 of the filing. Um I think that I would be in favor 00:32:36.400 --> 00:32:40.210 of issued an order that states that ERCOT is true up 00:32:40.210 --> 00:32:42.420 adjustment following complies with Tyra and the commission's 00:32:42.420 --> 00:32:46.140 that obligation order? Good me too. Do I hear a motion 00:32:46.140 --> 00:32:48.220 to approve the order? Can't believe I just heard a 00:32:48.220 --> 00:32:51.230 motion consistent uh to approve the order consistent 00:32:51.230 --> 00:32:54.259 with the proposed notice of approval filed by ERCOT 00:32:55.480 --> 00:32:58.539 And I would second um all those in favor say, aye, 00:32:58.549 --> 00:33:00.849 aye. Motion passes 00:33:06.150 --> 00:33:08.460 Steven. You wanna take us through Adam # 18 00:33:10.440 --> 00:33:12.809 um and I'm not going to take that up at this time 00:33:12.809 --> 00:33:14.839 Do you need to read that if we're not gonna take it 00:33:14.839 --> 00:33:16.789 up? We don't need to we will not be taking that up 00:33:16.799 --> 00:33:19.369 today. So with that Mr Chairman, I will return it back 00:33:19.369 --> 00:33:21.109 to you. Yeah. 00:33:25.339 --> 00:33:28.750 All right. Thank you. I think that brings us to item 00:33:28.759 --> 00:33:32.470 22, I believe We don't have anything on autumn 22 or 00:33:32.470 --> 00:33:37.450 23. We'll go to Out of 24 Please. 00:33:39.539 --> 00:33:44.299 (item:24)Out of 24 is project 52287. The power outage alert 00:33:44.309 --> 00:33:48.579 criteria. Uh Commission staff filed a memo and a proposal 00:33:48.579 --> 00:33:51.660 for adoption for new rule 25 27. 00:33:53.240 --> 00:33:57.109 Pretty straight straightforward proposal for adoption 00:33:57.119 --> 00:33:59.750 thoughts, comments or a motion to approve the proposal 00:33:59.750 --> 00:34:02.849 for adoption. I would move to approve one second. 00:34:04.589 --> 00:34:08.710 All in favor say, aye. None opposed motion passes. 00:34:09.840 --> 00:34:14.659 (item:25)The next item is I don't know is I don't remember 25 00:34:15.440 --> 00:34:17.769 wholesale electric market design commission Mcadams 00:34:17.769 --> 00:34:21.710 I know you filed a memo on this. Thank you for 00:34:23.239 --> 00:34:26.369 all the work that's gone into that. Any any comments 00:34:26.369 --> 00:34:30.909 we're gonna uh Mr Mr Chairman, Just uh first of all 00:34:30.920 --> 00:34:34.670 thank you for allowing to allowing me to to move forward 00:34:34.679 --> 00:34:39.980 on on this sort of peripheral project, um I would like 00:34:39.989 --> 00:34:44.260 if we could to table discussion on this because I believe 00:34:44.739 --> 00:34:46.920 well, I'd like to have Commissioner Gladfelter back 00:34:46.920 --> 00:34:48.929 so we could discuss this as a commission as a whole 00:34:48.940 --> 00:34:52.260 I packed a lot into that one memo and I apologize. 00:34:52.269 --> 00:34:54.809 Um but that way we could take it more comprehensively 00:34:54.820 --> 00:34:58.739 at the next open meeting indeed works for me. Same 00:34:59.949 --> 00:35:05.590 Appreciate It. Nothing on 26, 27, That'll bring us 00:35:05.590 --> 00:35:11.510 (item:29) to agenda item number 29, item 29 is Project 53401 00:35:11.519 --> 00:35:14.260 The electric weather preparedness standards. Phase 00:35:14.260 --> 00:35:18.010 two. Commission staff filed a memo and corrected proposed 00:35:18.010 --> 00:35:24.530 order to repeal current Rule 25.55 and adopt new Rule 00:35:24.530 --> 00:35:28.219 25.55 Regarding Weather Preparedness Standards. Thank 00:35:28.219 --> 00:35:31.050 you sir, thoughts, comments. 00:35:32.760 --> 00:35:36.889 Very important rule. It is an extremely important rule 00:35:36.900 --> 00:35:40.130 Um I look forward to the comments that come back on 00:35:40.130 --> 00:35:43.590 this just for the public and the Legislature on this 00:35:43.590 --> 00:35:46.579 one. We are attempting to establish a standard that 00:35:46.579 --> 00:35:49.260 will adjust to weather on an annual basis so that it 00:35:49.260 --> 00:35:55.340 can be updated over time. Um We're asking generator 00:35:55.340 --> 00:35:59.329 resources and lines companies to adopt mitigation strategies 00:35:59.329 --> 00:36:02.389 tied to weather that weather standard for both for 00:36:02.389 --> 00:36:06.829 both the resource and the wires uh in both seasons 00:36:06.840 --> 00:36:09.989 And we are requiring all generators to be inspected 00:36:10.000 --> 00:36:12.840 theoretically with this as as we move forward, subject 00:36:12.840 --> 00:36:16.989 to uh stakeholder comments uh to be inspected on a 00:36:16.989 --> 00:36:20.469 periodic basis in this case uh once every three years 00:36:20.469 --> 00:36:25.750 But yeah as we saw last winter this type of policy 00:36:25.750 --> 00:36:31.820 has positive features for the state. Um It proved essential 00:36:31.829 --> 00:36:34.789 during winter storm landing and I look forward to having 00:36:34.800 --> 00:36:39.989 a more permanent policy enshrined dynamic, permanent 00:36:39.989 --> 00:36:43.380 and dynamic and very important characters agreed. Yes 00:36:43.389 --> 00:36:46.599 Um Thank you for highlighting that. Commissioner Mcadams 00:36:46.610 --> 00:36:51.619 Uh This is a Phase two portion of two step phase and 00:36:51.630 --> 00:36:54.199 implementing weatherization preparation standards in 00:36:54.210 --> 00:36:58.650 ERCOT pursuant to S. B three. And as we saw during 00:36:58.650 --> 00:37:01.460 winter storm land in Phase one proved to be tremendously 00:37:01.829 --> 00:37:04.960 beneficial um and maintaining reliability through a 00:37:04.960 --> 00:37:09.380 significant icing event that we had. Um Phase two is 00:37:09.380 --> 00:37:12.599 extremely important as it will cover um continue to 00:37:12.599 --> 00:37:16.280 cover and provide um weatherization preparation standards 00:37:16.280 --> 00:37:20.550 based on market um weather weather study um for the 00:37:20.550 --> 00:37:24.900 winner and summer, which is really important and I 00:37:24.900 --> 00:37:28.389 look forward to working with stakeholders and staff 00:37:28.400 --> 00:37:31.840 to ensure that we have um these Phase two requirements 00:37:31.840 --> 00:37:35.929 in place to cover to cover these seasons effectively 00:37:35.940 --> 00:37:38.840 and to continue to maintain reliability with these 00:37:38.840 --> 00:37:41.380 very important standards that again as we noted, uh 00:37:41.389 --> 00:37:45.690 Chairman back in in the fall are this is landmark um 00:37:45.699 --> 00:37:48.329 actions. These are landmark actions that we're taking 00:37:48.340 --> 00:37:52.380 here at the commission with respect to um the weatherization 00:37:52.380 --> 00:37:55.909 preparation standards that are accompanied with $1 00:37:55.909 --> 00:38:00.420 million per violation per day. Um administrative penalties 00:38:00.429 --> 00:38:03.949 that um would have that authority, we have that authority 00:38:03.949 --> 00:38:07.889 that we've never had in the past. So important, critically 00:38:07.889 --> 00:38:11.980 important Agree on all points. These this is a key 00:38:11.980 --> 00:38:15.889 part of SB three and both of you noted. Most importantly 00:38:15.889 --> 00:38:18.750 these reforms make a difference in ensuring reliability 00:38:19.219 --> 00:38:21.789 Mr Chairman, excuse me for interrupting. I may have 00:38:21.789 --> 00:38:24.570 misstated. I just want to make sure we're correct. 00:38:24.570 --> 00:38:29.429 What is before he has a proposal for publication subject 00:38:29.429 --> 00:38:33.079 to feedback. Absolutely, stakeholders are a key part 00:38:33.079 --> 00:38:36.230 of this, which is why all three of us are looking forward 00:38:36.230 --> 00:38:36.750 to hearing. 00:38:38.719 --> 00:38:41.000 They're receiving their feedback and input and another 00:38:41.000 --> 00:38:43.320 staff does an excellent job of incorporate synthesizing 00:38:43.320 --> 00:38:47.480 that and incorporating stakeholder feedback. Another 00:38:47.489 --> 00:38:48.860 big step in the process. 00:38:50.619 --> 00:38:53.869 Is there a motion to approve the proposal for publication 00:38:54.590 --> 00:38:58.269 2nd, all in favor say, Aye, I'm not opposed the motion 00:38:58.269 --> 00:39:01.909 passes. We don't have anything on items. 30 through 00:39:01.909 --> 00:39:06.840 37 Which brings us to (item:38) item number 38 update from our 00:39:06.840 --> 00:39:10.059 executive director. Thank you. Mr Chairman. Good morning 00:39:10.059 --> 00:39:13.840 Commissioners. Uh First item is just a reminder of 00:39:13.849 --> 00:39:17.090 the electric supply chain security and mapping committee 00:39:17.099 --> 00:39:21.239 will hold a public meeting next Tuesday on May 31st 00:39:21.719 --> 00:39:24.630 to hear updates from all the different project teams 00:39:24.639 --> 00:39:28.190 and of particular note while we cannot show the electric 00:39:28.190 --> 00:39:31.090 supply chain map publicly. We will be having a discussion 00:39:31.090 --> 00:39:32.889 about some of the attributes that are on that. So I 00:39:32.889 --> 00:39:34.969 know people are very interested in those attributes 00:39:34.969 --> 00:39:38.380 So um, that meeting will be broadcast on texas admin 00:39:38.380 --> 00:39:40.030 like our open meetings. So I just want to give everybody 00:39:40.030 --> 00:39:44.070 a reminder of that regarding our turk appointments 00:39:44.070 --> 00:39:47.369 Charlie Hamelin has resigned his post as executive 00:39:47.369 --> 00:39:50.860 director of the Solar Association. So I'm gonna open 00:39:50.860 --> 00:39:55.760 up um nominations again for one of the seats. Uh, that 00:39:55.769 --> 00:39:59.519 is for industries that aren't otherwise uh spelled 00:39:59.519 --> 00:40:02.559 out in the bill. And so I'd ask that people put in 00:40:02.559 --> 00:40:05.389 their nominations by June nine so that we can get that 00:40:05.400 --> 00:40:08.179 vacancy filled quickly on turk because it's important 00:40:08.179 --> 00:40:10.400 that we have all of our seats filled as we go into 00:40:10.400 --> 00:40:13.949 the next turk meeting. Unfortunately Commissioner got 00:40:13.949 --> 00:40:16.630 filthy is not here, but you all may have heard it's 00:40:16.630 --> 00:40:20.480 not as loud today, but construction has begun On his 00:40:20.480 --> 00:40:23.349 office and our 5th Commissioner Office, the estimated 00:40:23.349 --> 00:40:27.289 timeline is to have that completed by September 30 00:40:27.300 --> 00:40:31.360 of this year. So we will continue to work with facilities 00:40:31.360 --> 00:40:34.239 commission to make sure that uh, we, we stick as close 00:40:34.239 --> 00:40:37.510 as we can to that construction schedule. And the last 00:40:37.510 --> 00:40:40.349 item of note and possibly the most important as you 00:40:40.349 --> 00:40:43.940 all see, Connie is not here. She is traveling to Fayetteville 00:40:43.940 --> 00:40:47.099 Arkansas as the UT softball team has made the super 00:40:47.099 --> 00:40:50.329 regionals, they play tonight at six o'clock on ESPN 00:40:50.329 --> 00:40:53.260 two. So I would ask that, you know, if you, if you 00:40:53.260 --> 00:40:55.059 don't have anything else going on tonight after, you 00:40:55.059 --> 00:40:58.000 know this exhausting open meeting that you uh you tune 00:40:58.000 --> 00:41:00.639 in and uh and you're on the ut softball team as they 00:41:00.639 --> 00:41:03.670 try to make it to the College World Series. Indeed 00:41:05.309 --> 00:41:10.369 I'm sorry jimmy's not here too. Rain accolades upon 00:41:10.369 --> 00:41:13.170 you for your work on the construction, but I'm sure 00:41:13.170 --> 00:41:16.869 he sends them from afar, remarkable job on the mapping 00:41:16.880 --> 00:41:20.139 See some of the folks here who worked on it, outstanding 00:41:20.139 --> 00:41:25.800 work and most importantly, hook em horns. I will support 00:41:25.809 --> 00:41:31.750 any texas team advancing to the World Series Commissioner 00:41:31.750 --> 00:41:35.019 Mcadams, as I've told Connie I no matter how much I 00:41:35.019 --> 00:41:36.969 love her and Camille, I will refuse to wear that god 00:41:36.969 --> 00:41:39.750 awful color. But I will, I will support them. That's 00:41:39.750 --> 00:41:41.219 right. I will support them from my living room. 00:41:44.909 --> 00:41:47.269 This commission maintains the position of hook em horns 00:41:47.280 --> 00:41:52.739 Thank you. Mr Grayson. 00:41:55.309 --> 00:41:57.710 Well sir, that makes me say it's 10 12 and oh you 00:41:57.710 --> 00:41:58.630 still sucks. 00:42:00.909 --> 00:42:04.219 That's in the transcript, man, that's legal advice 00:42:07.789 --> 00:42:12.949 Alright, that covers everything for item 38. I don't 00:42:12.949 --> 00:42:17.820 have anything else on the to take up today. So having 00:42:17.820 --> 00:42:20.739 no further business before this commission, this meeting 00:42:20.739 --> 00:42:23.030 of the public utility commission of texas is hereby 00:42:23.039 --> 00:42:23.590 adjourned