* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.
          WE DO. 
          SO LET'S 
          [00:00:01]
GO, LET'S CALL A MEETING TO ORDER. 
          THIS IS THE ELECTRIC UTILITY COMMISSION. 
          NOVEMBER 18TH, 2024. 
          [PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL]
UH, FIRST THING IS PUBLIC COMMUNICATION. 
          DO WE HAVE SPEAKERS? WE HAVE SEVEN SPEAKERS. 
          FIRST IS CRAIG NASER. 
          YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES. 
          HELLO, CRAIG NASER, PRESIDENT AUSTIN ENVIRONMENTAL DEMOCRATS AND CONSERVATION CHAIR OF THE LONE STAR CHAPTER OF THE SIERRA CLUB. 
          BOTH OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS OVERWHELMINGLY OPPOSE A NEW GAS ELECTRIC GENERATION PLANT. 
          ANTHROPOGENIC CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL, IS HAPPENING NOW, AND WE AREN'T DOING NEARLY ENOUGH TO STOP RISING ATMOSPHERIC CO2 LEVELS. 
          GREENHOUSE GAS HAS REACHED RECORD LEVELS IN 2023 AND THE WORLD REACH RECORD HEAT AN AVERAGE OF 1.54 DEGREES CENTIGRADE SURPASSING THE 1.5 DEGREES CENTIGRADE BENCHMARK ENSHRINED IN THE PARIS AGREEMENT. 
          2024 IS ALREADY ON TRACK TO SHATTER ALL THOSE RECORDS SPENDING ON OIL, GAS, AND COAL. 
          INCREASED BY A FACTOR OF FOUR IN 2022. 
          AND FOSSIL FUEL SUBSIDIES ARE AT RECORD HIGHS. 
          METHANE IS A GREENHOUSE. 
          GAS IS 80 TIMES MORE POTENT THAN CO2 30% OF THE CURRENT MEASURED WARMING IS CAUSED BY METHANE. 
          ATMOSPHERIC METHANE IS AT RECORD HIGHS IN THE LAST 800,000 YEARS. 
          METHANE EMISSIONS BY THE FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY AND THE USA CONTINUE TO RISE AT A RAPID RATE. 
          THERE WILL BE NO CAVALRY COMING OVER THE HILL TO SAVE US FROM CLIMATE CHANGE FROM EITHER THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OR THE STATE GOVERNMENT, WHICH ARE BOTH NOW CONTROLLED BY A PARTY OF SCIENCE DENIERS. 
          THE FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY DOESN'T CARE. 
          THEY BELIEVE THE CUSTOMER HAS NO CHOICE. 
          TEXAS GAS SERVICE DIDN'T EVEN FIND IT NECESSARY TO ATTEND THE LAST RATE CASE HEARING THIS FALL. 
          THEY KNEW THAT AUSTIN RATE PAYERS HAD NO CHOICE BUT TO SUBSIDIZE EXPANDING METHANE USE. 
          THERE IS INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE ASSUMPTION THAT IF WE WANT RELIABLE ENERGY, AWESOME MUST CONTINUE TO SUPPORT DUMPING EVER INCREASING AMOUNTS OF METHANE INTO THE ATMOSPHERE THROUGH THE MINING PROCESS, AND THEN BURNING THE REST OF THAT METHANE TO PRODUCE EVEN MORE. 
          CO2 OH YES. 
          MINUS THE METHANE USED TO PRODUCE SINGLE USE PLASTIC BAGS. 
          AS SOMEONE WHO CARES DEEPLY ABOUT THE PLANET EARTH, I HAVE UPGRADED MY HOME TO A METAL ROOF. 
          ADDED EXTRA ATTIC INSULATION, INSTALLED A SEAR 27 AIR CONDITIONING UNIT, UPGRADED TO INFRARED, REFLECTING EXTERIOR PAINT, CUSTOM FIT TRIPLE PANE WINDOWS, AND THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF SOLAR PANELS, 10 THAT OS ENERGY WOULD ALLOW WITH THE VALUE OF SOLAR PROGRAM, I DID NOT DO ALL OF THAT JUST TO CONTINUE PAYING FOR ENERGY THE DIRECTLY SUPPORTS THE DESTRUCTION OF THE PLANET EARTH. 
          I WOULD RATHER SPEND MY MONEY BUYING ANOTHER 10 SOLAR PANELS AND A HOUSE BATTERY AND THEN BE DONE WITH ALL ENERGY COMPANIES COMPLETELY. 
          HOW WILL THAT HELP AUSTIN ENERGY? I LIKE OUR SOCIALIST ELECTRICITY, BUT MANY AUSTINITES DO NOT SUPPORT ANY MORE FOSSIL FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION PLANTS. 
          WE SUPPORT THE RECOMMENDATION ON ITEM FIVE. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          PERFECT TIMING. 
          UH, NEXT SPEAKER IS BEN SOTHEBY. 
          HI, I AM BEN SOBE. 
          I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF MYSELF. 
          I'M NOT SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF MY EMPLOYER OR ANY NON-PROFIT BOARD THAT I SIT ON OR SOCCER SUPPORTER CLUB THAT I'M A PART OF OR ANY ANYBODY ELSE, JUST MYSELF. 
          BUT I DO TALK TO A LOT OF PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY. 
          UH, IT'S SOMETHING I LOVE, UH, ON THE BUS THIS MORNING AT WORK, JUST ANYWHERE YOU FIND ME. 
          STOP ME AT HEB AND CHAT ME UP. 
          AND EVERYONE I TALK TO TELLS ME THEY WANT MORE STABILITY IN OUR GRID. 
          THEY FEAR STORMS THAT HAPPEN, THOSE ONE-OFF EVENTS, BUT THEY'RE REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE. 
          THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY SEE HAPPENING ALL OVER THE WORLD. 
          FLOODS IN SPAIN. 
          YOU KNOW, ANY, ANYTIME THE SKY'S DARKENED OR, YOU KNOW, WE GET TO THIS TIME OF YEAR, PEOPLE ARE REMEMBERING HALLOWEEN FLOODS. 
          THEY'RE REMEMBERING FREEZES THAT HAPPENED AT THE START OF A NEW YEAR, UH, THAT 
          [00:05:01]
SEND THEM SCRAMBLING. 
          AND THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO POLITICAL APPETITE FOR ANY MORE GENERATION TECHNOLOGIES THAT ARE BASED ON BURNING STUFF. 
          WE WANT THINGS THAT ARE RENEWABLE. 
          WE WANT THINGS THAT ARE TECHNOLOGIES THAT ALREADY EXIST. 
          SOLAR STORAGE. 
          THEY WANT THESE IN SCALE. 
          THEY WANT THEM GRID TIDE. 
          THEY WANT THEM PROVIDING GOOD UNION JOBS. 
          THAT'S ANOTHER COMMON THEME THAT I HEAR IS THAT, UH, HEY, WE OWN OUR PUBLIC UTILITY AND, AND THOSE ARE GOOD JOBS AND WE NEED TO KEEP THEM HERE AND WE NEED TO PROVIDE FOR MORE JOBS. 
          I'M THINKING ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED JUST, UH, NOT, NOT YESTERDAY, BUT A WEEK AGO YESTERDAY, HOW STORAGE BATTERIES ON THE ERCOT GRID MET 8% OF DEMAND PRICES SPIKED, AND PLACES THAT HAD ALREADY INSTALLED THAT STORAGE WERE ABLE TO RESPOND TO THAT. 
          OUR LOCAL PUBLIC UTILITY NEEDS TO INVEST HEAVILY IN ALL KINDS OF STORAGE. 
          DOESN'T HAVE TO BE JUST BATTERIES. 
          THAT'S DEFINITELY SHOULD BE IN THE MIX. 
          BUT IT COULD BE COMPRESSED AIR, IT COULD BE GEOTHERMAL, SAND BATTERIES. 
          THERE'S ALL KINDS OF TECHNOLOGIES OUT THERE, BUT WE NEED TO GET GOING FAST TO DEPLOY THOSE BECAUSE THE SAVINGS, THE BENEFITS TO OUR CLIMATE AND TO OUR COMMUNITY ARE AVAILABLE RIGHT NOW. 
          THEY'RE HAPPENING NOW, AND WE CAN BE LEADERS IN THIS. 
          AND AGAIN, YOU KNOW, BIG LATINO FAMILIES SPREAD ALL OVER TEXAS. 
          IF THEY CAN DO BATTERIES DOWN IN SAN ANTONIO, I KNOW AUSTIN CAN BEAT THEM, RIGHT? I KNOW WE CAN DO BETTER. 
          SO I JUST WANT TO AGAIN, SHARE THAT THE POLITICAL APPETITE AMONGST OUR COMMUNITY, YES, THEY WANT TO KEEP AN EYE ON OUR BILLS. 
          OUR BILLS ARE, YOU KNOW, LOWER THAN MOST OTHER PLACES IN TEXAS. 
          'CAUSE WE OWN OUR OWN UTILITY, BUT THEY WANT GOOD CLEAN ENERGY STORAGE, GOOD UNION JOBS. 
          THEY DON'T WANT FOSSIL FUEL. 
          THANK YOU. 
          NEXT SPEAKER IS AL BRADEN MAY KNOW THAT. 
          ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. 
          GOOD EVENING. 
          UH, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS AND AUSTIN ENERGY STAFF. 
          I'M AL BRADEN, A DISTRICT SEVEN VOTER AND AUSTIN ENERGY SHAREHOLDER. 
          MY SOLAR SEA GUEST, NO SHIRT IS NOW NINE YEARS OLD AND I REALLY, REALLY WANT TO RETIRE IT. 
          COULD I HAVE THE FIRST SLIDE? FIRST SLIDE. 
          AH, THERE WE GO. 
          NO, THAT, UH, GO BACK. 
          ONE. 
          UH, IN 2014, ONE OF AUSTIN'S VISIONARY CLIMATE LEADERS, CHRIS RILEY, WORKED TO ELIMINATE FOSSIL FUELS FROM OUR PORTFOLIO BY 2030, WE EVENTUALLY CAME TO AN AGREEMENT ON 2035. 
          UNFORTUNATELY, CHRIS RILEY IS NO LONGER WITH US, BUT HIS LEGACY CARRIES ON IN THE CLIMATE LEADERS ON THIS COUNCIL AND THE CLIMATE LEADERS THAT WILL BE ON THE NEXT COUNCIL AND IN AUSTIN'S ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT. 
          NEXT SLIDE. 
          IN 2015, OUR CITY LEADERS WENT TO PARIS TO HELP FIGHT FOR CLI AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE AND TO HELP FIGHT FOR THE PARIS CLIMATE AGREEMENT. 
          HERE IS, UH, MAYOR PRO TEM LESLIE POOLE, ALONG WITH MAYOR ADLER, COMMISSIONER SHEA AND FORMER EUC CHAIR MICHAEL OSBORNE, PARIS COMMITTED TO STOP THE GLOBAL TEMPERATURE RISE AT TWO DEGREES AND 1.5 DEGREES IF AT ALL POSSIBLE. 
          NEXT SLIDE. 
          WELL, WE'VE REACHED THE 1.5 DEGREE LIFETIME LIMIT THIS YEAR. 
          RIGHT NOW, THE WORLD SOIL AND GAS MINISTERS ARE MEETING AT COP 29 TO PUT A PETROL FRIENDLY FACE ON BUSINESS AS USUAL. 
          AND WE HAVE TO ADMIT IT, THE PARIS AGREEMENT IS DEAD. 
          IT'S UP TO US TO TAKE LOCAL ACTION AS BEST WE CAN TO MINIMIZE OUR EMISSIONS. 
          NEXT SLIDE. 
          I STRONGLY SUPPORT THE EU C'S RESOLUTION TO HOLD THE LINE ON ANY FURTHER CARBON EMISSIONS, STRONGLY REJECTING ANY NEW PEAKER PLANTS THAT COULD LEAVE US BURNING MORE METHANE FOR DECADES TO COME. 
          WE'VE JUST GOTTA QUIT THE SMOKING HABIT. 
          NEXT SLIDE. 
          IT'S CLEAR AND DIRECT AUSTIN'S OWN MODELING THAT YOU'LL SEE ON PAGE 54 OF TONIGHT'S PRESENTATION. 
          DOESN'T USE THE DECKER PEAKERS FOR GENERATION. 
          THESE NEARLY 200 MEGAWATTS OF POWER ARE HELD IN RESERVE AS ANCILLARY SERVICES. 
          A NEW BATTERY FLEET IN ERCOT NOW BEGINS TO DOMINATE THAT MARKET. 
          AUSTIN ENERGY'S OWN MODELS KEEP THE DECKER PLANTS IN RESERVE UNTIL 2035 WHILE ASKING US TO BUY A NEW FLAT FLEET OF GAS TURBINES TO SERVE PEAK LOAD. 
          WE ALREADY HAVE 486 MEGAWATTS OF PEAKERS REPRESENTING OVER A QUARTER OF OUR ENTIRE DISPATCHABLE ENERGY FLEET. 
          LET'S USE THEM AS NEEDED. 
          NEXT SLIDE. 
          [00:10:01]
THESE ARE THE PEAKERS AT, UH, SANDHILL AND DECKER. 
          THERE'S PLENTY OF ROOM AND LOTS OF TRANSMISSION SUPPORT ON BOTH OF THOSE SITES FOR LOTS OF BATTERIES TO BE PLACED. 
          NEXT SLIDE BETWEEN DECKER AND SANDHILL, ALONG HIGHWAY ONE 30, TESLA JUST PUT IN 135 MEGAWATT TIMES TWO HOUR BATTERY PACK. 
          THIS SEPTEMBER I LOOKED IT UP ON GOOGLE EARTH. 
          IF YOU MAKE THAT 50% LARGER, IT COULD SUPPLY THOSE ANCILLARY SERVICES WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. 
          WHILE FREEING DECKER'S PEAKERS TO GENERATE POWER WHEN THEY'RE CALLED ON YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED. 
          I'LL HAVE TO MAIL YOU THE REST. 
          BUT ANYWAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANKS FOR HELPING ON THE SLIDES. 
          NEXT SPEAKER IS BECKY HALPIN. 
          AFTER BECKY IS RICHARD HALPIN. 
          HI, I AM BECKY HALPIN AND I REPRESENT THIRD ACT TEXAS A UH, ORGANIZATION OF OLDER PEOPLE INTERESTED IN WORKING ON THE ISSUE OF CLIMATE CHANGE. 
          ACCORDING TO THE AUSTIN AMERICAN STATESMEN, IN AN ARTICLE LAST APRIL, TEXAS HAS SOME OF THE HIGHEST HOMEOWNERS INSURANCE RATES IN THE COUNTRY. 
          SINCE 2018, TEXANS HAVE SPENT HAVE SEEN A 51% INCREASE IN THEIR HOMEOWNERS INSURANCE. 
          AND RENTERS ARE NOT PROTECTED FROM THE SKY HIGH ESCALATION BECAUSE THEY GET HIT WHEN THEIR LANDLORDS PASS THE COST ONTO THEM AND RENT INCREASES. 
          INSURANCE RATES IN TEXAS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN HIGH, BUT 2023 TOOK THE STATE TO A WHOLE NEW LEVEL AS THE AVERAGE ANNUAL COST OF HOME INSURANCE IN TEXAS WAS $3,875, WHICH IS 113% MORE THAN THE AVERAGE NATIONWIDE, WHICH IS AROUND $1,800. 
          INSURANCE COSTS ARE RISING IN TEXAS BECAUSE WEATHER EVENTS ARE BECOMING MORE FREQUENT AND SEVERE. 
          AND THIS, OF COURSE, IS A DIRECT RESULT OF THE CLIMATE CRISIS IF BURNING FOSSIL FUELS IS SEEN AS AN ECONOMICAL WAY TO PRODUCE ENERGY. 
          WE ALSO NEED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE FACT THAT BURNING FOSSIL FUELS HAS A VERY EXPENSIVE SIDE EFFECT OF CAUSING ATMOSPHERIC HEATING AND ASSOCIATED WEATHER EVENTS SUCH AS HAIL, WIND, ICE STORMS, FLOODING, DROUGHT, AND FIRE THAT DAMAGE OUR HOMES AND IMPACT OUR LIVELIHOODS. 
          WHEN WE THINK ABOUT KEEPING ELECTRIC RATES AFFORDABLE BY BURNING COAL GAS, WE ARE SIMULTANEOUSLY MAKING THE COST OF OWNING OR RENTING LESS, LESS AFFORDABLE BECAUSE WE ARE DRIVING OUR INSURANCE RATES UP. 
          SO HOW DOES ANYONE COME OUT AHEAD IF AUSTIN IS BURNING FOSSIL FUELS TO STAY WITHIN ITS ELECTRIC AFFORDABILITY TARGET OF 2% A YEAR, BUT CUSTOMERS ARE ABSORBING HUGE INSURANCE PREMIUM ESCALATIONS EVERY YEAR. 
          ARE WE REALLY HELPING THEM? AND THIS IS NOT, UM, THIS DOES NOT EVEN ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF THE DAMAGE TO OUR ECONOMY, THAT CLIMATE CHANGE CAUSES WITH WEATHER, EVENTS, DROUGHT AND FLOOD. 
          THE OLD ADAGE, PENNY SMART AND POUND FOOLISH, WOULD BE RIGHT ON THE MARK FOR CONTINUED FOSSIL FUEL GENERATION. 
          THANKS. 
          I HOPE YOU'LL ALL SUPPORT, UH, THE, UH, ITEM NUMBER FIVE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          NEXT SPEAKER IS RICHARD HALPIN. 
          GOOD EVENING. 
          MY NAME IS RICHARD HALPIN AND I AM ASSOCIATED WITH THE TEXAS ALLIANCE OF RETIRED AMERICANS THIRD ACT, TEXAS AND THE SIERRA CLUB. 
          I WANNA SPEAK TO YOU TONIGHT ABOUT APPRECIATION. 
          YOU. 
          THE E-U-C-E-U-C MEMBERS HAVE GENEROUSLY GIVEN OF YOUR TIME, TALENTS, AND EXPERTISE TO CREATE A FOSSIL FUEL FREE ENERGY GENERATION AND CLIMATE PROTECTION PLAN FOR ALL OF US IN CENTRAL TEXAS, WE HAVE ALL READ THE REPORTS THAT CLEARLY SHOW THE CONNECTION BETWEEN TOXIC FUEL WASTE, INCLUDING DEADLY PARTICULATE MATTER AND AN ALTERNATIVE ENERGY GENERATION STORAGE AND DELIVERY SYSTEM THAT WILL HELP KEEP OUR CLIMATE A LITTLE CLEANER, COOLER, 
          [00:15:02]
AND SAFER, AND MAKE ENERGY MORE AFFORDABLE. 
          YOU AUSTIN ENERGY TEAM MEMBERS HAVE PARTICIPATED IN HELPING MAKE TEXAS A GLOBAL LEADER IN AFFORDABLE CLEAN ENERGY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          NOW WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO EVEN BETTER 'CAUSE OF YOU AND BECAUSE OF YOU IN THE UPCOMING PRESENTATIONS TO OUR CITY COUNCIL, I ASK YOU TO CONTINUE YOUR FOSSIL FUEL FREE RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          THE HEALTH, EVEN THE LIVES OF OUR CHILDREN AND ALL LIVING ENTITIES WILL BE AFFECTED BY THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND ACTIONS THAT YOU ALL TAKE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          NEXT SPEAKER, BECKY SMITH. 
          GOOD EVENING. 
          IF YOUR NAME IS BECKY OR RICHARD, YOU GET TO GO NEXT. 
          . 
          I LEARNED. 
          UM, MY NAME IS BECKY SMITH. 
          UM, I'M HERE REPRESENTING CLEAN WATER ACTION. 
          I'M OUR TEXAS DIRECTOR, WHICH MEANS, UM, I ACTUALLY DON'T LIVE IN AUSTIN AND I DON'T USE YOUR ENERGY AND I'M JEALOUS OF IT BECAUSE I LIVE IN HOUSTON WHERE WE'RE NOT KNOWN FOR OUR CREATIVE PROBLEM SOLVING AND LEADERSHIP, UM, NEARLY SO MUCH AS OUR AUSTIN COUNTERPART. 
          BUT I AM HERE ON BEHALF OF OUR 3,500 MEMBERS THAT DO THAT. 
          OUR CUSTOMERS OF AUSTIN, THE AUSTIN ENERGY UTILITY, UM, AND THOSE WHO'VE GONE BEFORE ME HAVE IT RIGHT. 
          UM, THEY DON'T WANT A NEW GAS PLANT. 
          UH, CLEAN WATER ACTION'S MISSION IS TO PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT, PUBLIC HEALTH AND OUR COMMUNITY QUALITY OF LIFE. 
          UM, WE OPPOSE A NEW GAS, UH, ELECTRIC GENERATION PLANT. 
          WE DON'T NEED IT. 
          UM, THERE IS SUCH A BRAIN TRUST HERE IN AUSTIN WHO'S WHO HAVE, HAVE MODELED CLEAN ENERGY AND REALLY, UM, INTEGRATED AND CUTTING EDGE WATER SYSTEMS. UM, I KNOW THAT WE HAVE THE CREATIVE POWER TO DO THE, TO, TO DO THE COMPLEX, UM, PROCESSES THAT ARE NECESSARY TO INTEGRATE ALL KINDS OF ENERGY GENERATION AND STORAGE AND EFFICIENCY, EXCUSE ME, AND CONSERVATION. 
          UM, WE HAVE FAITH IN THIS UTILITY TO DO THAT IN A WAY THAT, AGAIN, I DON'T FEEL LIKE I HAVE THE LUXURY TO SAY THE SAME WHERE I LIVE AND WHERE I GET MY ENERGY FROM. 
          WE ALL KNOW THAT CLIMATE CHANGE IS WATER CHANGE. 
          CLEAN WATERS MEMBERS CARE VERY MUCH ABOUT THE FUTURE OF OUR PLANET. 
          I THINK MOST OF US ALSO KNOW THAT THE PLANET'S GOING TO BE FINE, WE'RE JUST NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO LIVE ON IT, BUT SHE'S GONNA BE FINE. 
          SO I WANT TO, I WANT US TO DO, DO THE BEST THAT WE CAN OVERCOME THE HURDLES OF COMPLEXITY AND INTRICATE SYSTEMS, UM, TO MAKE IT LIVABLE FOR US NOW AND FOR OUR NEAR GENERATIONS. 
          AGAIN. 
          UH, SO WE RECOMMEND A SUPPORT FOR THE ACT, UM, THE ITEM FIVE THAT YOU'LL SEE TONIGHT. 
          AND, UM, , I MIGHT NOT GET THANKED FOR THIS BY MY, BY MY PEERS, BUT I'LL JUST GO AHEAD AND SAY KEEP AUSTIN WIRED. 
          THANKS. 
          FINAL SPEAKER IS CAMILLE COOK. 
          GOOD EVENING EVERYONE, EVERYONE. 
          MY NAME IS CAMILLE COOK AND I'M HERE TODAY AS AN ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ADVOCATE WITH PUBLIC CITIZEN. 
          YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN AT MOST OF THE UC MEETINGS OVER THE PAST YEAR IN THE BACK, POSTED UP LISTENING IN. 
          AND SO I KNOW THIS RESOURCE PLAN UPDATE HAS BEEN LONG AND THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF INFORMATION TO SORT AND SIFT THROUGH. 
          AND SO I WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT SOME INFORMATION THAT'S COME OUT OF THESE MEETINGS THAT I THINK ARE IMPORTANT THAT I DON'T WANT ANYONE TO MISS WHILE WE WRAP THIS UP. 
          THE FIRST THING IS THAT FROM THE PUBLIC INPUT SURVEY THAT AE CONDUCTED LAST AUGUST, WE SAW THAT 60 CENT PERCENT, 66% OF AUSTINITES SAID THAT THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO HAVE A HIGHER ENERGY BILL IN ORDER TO HAVE CLEANER ENERGY. 
          THE PEOPLE OF AUSTIN CARE ABOUT A CLEAN FUTURE AND CARE ABOUT HAVING NORMAL WEATHER THAT ALLOWS FOR THE ENVIRONMENT IN OUR LIVES TO PROSPER. 
          AND ESPECIALLY, ESPECIALLY IN THE POLARIZED POLITICS OF TODAY. 
          WE'RE NOT GONNA GET A CLEARER DIRECTIVE FROM THE PEOPLE THAN 66%. 
          SECOND IN THE MODELED PORTFOLIOS FROM ASCEND, WE SAW A GRAPH THAT SHOWED THAT ZERO EMISSIONS 
          [00:20:01]
PORTFOLIO WOULD INCREASE RELIABILITY FASTER THAN ANY OTH OF THE OTHER MODELED PORTFOLIOS. 
          WE SEE IMMEDIATE RELIABILITY BENEFITS FROM INVESTING IN MORE BATTERIES, LOCAL SOLAR AND DEMAND RESPONSE AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY THAN INVESTING IN PEAKER PLANTS. 
          AND THOSE BENEFITS COME FASTER TOO. 
          AND LASTLY, AE HASN'T MODELED ANYTHING RELATED TO CARBON CAPTURE UTILIZATION AND SEQUESTRATION, YET THEY'RE STILL APPARENTLY RELYING ON IT TO HELP REACH THEIR CARBON NEUTRAL GOAL BY 2035. 
          THIS IS A BIG RED FLAG TO ME AS CARBON CAPTURE IS INCREDIBLY EXPENSIVE, HAS NOT BEEN EXTENSIVELY TESTED AND REQUIRES A LOT OF ENERGY. 
          EVEN IF CARBON CAPTURE TAKES OFF AS ELECTRICITY DEMAND INCREASES. 
          AS WE ALL KNOW IN TEXAS, WE COULD END UP IN A SITUATION WHERE PEOPLE, DATA CENTERS AND CARBON CAPTURE FACILITIES ARE COMPETING FOR ELECTRICITY. 
          IF WE CREATE EVEN MORE COMPETITION BETWEEN PEOPLE, INDUSTRY AND THE CLIMATE, NO ONE'S GONNA WIN. 
          THE ONLY THING THAT WILL HAPPEN IS WE WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE FOCUS GROUPS, WORKING GROUPS AND DEBATES WHILE OUR PLANET COOKS. 
          A PROPER SOLUTION IS TO FUTURE PROOF AS BEST AS WE CAN. 
          TRUMP IS COMING INTO OFFICE AND HE WILL BE EVISCERATING ALL KINDS OF CLIMATE COMMITMENTS. 
          WE NEED TO LISTEN TO THE DIRECTIVE OF THE PEOPLE BECOME MORE EFFICIENT AND MORE GREEN AS THE EEC RESOLUTION STATES. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          THAT'S ALL THE SPEAKERS WE HAVE. 
          I'D LIKE TO THANK ALL THE SPEAKERS. 
          UM, BEFORE WE GET INTO THE MINUTES, WE HAVE A NEW MEMBER, LAURA AND BELLAMY, YOU WANNA INTRODUCE YOURSELF? SURE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          I'M LAUREN BELLAMY. 
          I'M HONORED TO SERVE ON THIS COMMISSION WITH ALL OF YOU. 
          I'VE BEEN AN AUSTIN RESIDENT FOR OVER 20 YEARS. 
          UM, ALONG A LARGE PART OF THAT TIME I'VE BEEN WORKING AS AN ATTORNEY ADVISING GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES LIKE THE CITY OF AUSTIN, AND I'M EXCITED TO WORK WITH AND LEARN FROM ALL OF YOU. 
          AND WHO, WHO APPOINTED YOU? OH, I'M THE MAYOR'S APPOINTEE. 
          WELL, WELCOME ABOARD. 
          WELCOME. 
          OKAY. 
          [APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
NEXT APPROVAL OF MINUTES. 
          SO DO WE HAVE ANY UPDATES TO THE MINUTES? DO WE HAVE A MOTION? CYRUS MOTION? DO WE HAVE A SECOND? JOSH? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          AYE. 
          AYE. 
          GOT, UH, TWO HANDS RAISED, THREE HANDS RAISED ONLINE. 
          OKAY. 
          THROUGH WITH THAT. 
          [Items 2 & 3]
SO WHY DON'T WE BREAK APART THE DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS TWO, THREE, AND FOUR. 
          ANYONE WANT TO PULL THOSE AND DISCUSS THOSE? FOUR? OKAY, BUT YOU WANNA SEE FOUR, PLEASE. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          HAVE FOUR? ANYONE ELSE FOR ANY OF THE OTHERS? OKAY. 
          HOW ABOUT IF WE GET TWO AND THREE OUT OF THE WAY? DO I HAVE A MOTION ON TWO AND THREE'S? IRIS, SECOND. 
          JOSH? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          AYE. 
          AYE. 
          YOU LOOKED AT ME. 
          SORRY. 
          . 
          THANK YOU. 
          I'M GONNA COUNT ON YOU. 
          OKAY. 
          SO TWO AND THREE. 
          AND THEN KABA, 
          [4. Recommend approval authorizing the negotiation and execution of an amendment to the professional services agreement for engineering services for the Austin Energy Staff Augmentation Engineering and Related Engineering Services for Electric System Engineering and Technical Services Rotation List with the following two firms (or other qualified responders): HDR Engineering, Inc. and Allegis Group Holdings, Inc. in the amount of $22,500,000 for a total contract amount not to exceed $70,875,000. Funding: Funding is available in the Capital Budget of Austin Energy.]
DO YOU WANT TO TAKE OVER FOR QUESTIONS ON NUMBER FOUR? I SURE. 
          YEAH. 
          AM AM I ON CHECK? YOUR MIC SHOULD BE ON. 
          YOU CAN USE MINE IF YOU NEED. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, YEAH, I MEAN, I SEE THE LIST OF, IT SEEMS LIKE A LONG LIST OF, OF POSSIBLE OR PROJECTS THAT THE PAST CONTRACT HAS HELPED WITH. 
          I WAS JUST HOPING YOU COULD MAYBE GIVE US A LITTLE MORE INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT IT IS THAT WE'RE APPROVING THESE FUNDS FOR GOING FORWARD. 
          UM, SURE. 
          THIS IS, UM, ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE CURRENT CONTRACT WHILE WE GO OUT FOR, UM, THROUGH THE RFP PROCESS FOR ANOTHER CONTRACT NEXT YEAR. 
          UM, THIS IS A, FOR A VARIETY OF THINGS IN THE ENGINEERING SERVICES REALM. 
          UM, IT'S SPLIT ABOUT 50 50 BETWEEN TRANSMISSION, SUBSTATION AND THEN DISTRIBUTION. 
          SO IT'S EVERYTHING FROM PLANNING STUDIES TO STAFF AUGMENTATION FOR OUR DESIGN TEAMS, UH, TRANSMISSION SUBSTATION, ENGINEERING SERVICES. 
          IT COULD BE USED FOR, UM, LAND ACQUISITION IF WE NEED THAT FOR ANY OF OUR PROJECTS. 
          IT COULD BE, YOU KNOW, AD HOC OR, OR ENTIRE PROJECTS. 
          SO IT'S, IT'S A, IT'S A LARGE UMBRELLA OF SERVICES THAT IT COVERS. 
          COULD IT INCLUDE ENGINEERING FOR THE DEPLOYMENT OF THE PEAKER PLANTS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED? UH, I DON'T THINK SO. 
          I'M LOOKING AT LISA AND SHE'S SHAKING HER HEAD. 
          SO NO, THIS IS MORE TRADITIONAL SYSTEM ENGINEERING AND YEAH. 
          WIRE SIDE. 
          OKAY. 
          SO WE WILL SEE A SEPARATE CONTRACT IF THAT WERE TO MOVE FORWARD. 
          YES. 
          , IF, IF THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVES OUR PLAN, DO YOU, DO YOU MIND JUST SURE. 
          THANKS. 
          [00:25:02]
EVENING, BOB CON, GENERAL MANAGER. 
          YEAH. 
          BEFORE WE COULD BUILD ANYTHING, WE WOULD'VE TO COME BACK TO CITY COUNCIL AND OBVIOUSLY IF IT'S AN ITEM FOR COUNCIL TO COME TO YOU FIRST, UH, IF WE'RE TO BUILD A PEAKER. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , THAT WAS ALL. 
          OKAY. 
          DO WE HAVE A MOTION? ? I, I SUPPORT MONEY FOR ENGINEERING, FOR DISTRIBUTION AND TRANSMISSION SERVICES. 
          SO YES. 
          THANK YOU. 
          DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SURE. 
          OKAY. 
          ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          AYE. 
          OKAY, SO THAT FOUR IN FIVE, WHY DON'T WE MOVE THAT TO AFTER EIGHT WHERE WE GET THE STAFF BRIEFING. 
          THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          [6. Staff briefing on the Fourth Quarter Financial Report by Stephanie Koudelka, Finance Director.]
AND SO LET'S START OFF WITH NUMBER SIX, STAFF BRIEFING IN FOURTH QUARTER. 
          GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. 
          I AM STEPHANIE ALKA PRESENTING TO YOU OUR FOURTH QUARTER REPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. 
          UM, WHILE IT'S LOADING, I'LL LET YOU KNOW THAT THE NUMBERS I'M PRESENTING TO YOU THIS EVENING ARE VERY PRELIMINARY. 
          WE ARE CLOSING OUT THE YEAR. 
          SO, UM, A LOT OF ADJUSTMENTS THAT ARE YET TO BE MADE AS WE MOVE THROUGH THE AUDIT PROCESS. 
          BUT THESE ARE, UM, FINAL CLOSE NUMBERS, UM, FOR PRELIMINARY, CLOSE FOR 24. 
          NEXT SLIDE. 
          WE HAVE A STANDARD AGENDA FOR THE QUARTERLY PRESENTATION THIS EVENING. 
          I'LL RUN THROUGH AN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF OUR FINANCIAL RESULTS, UM, GIVE YOU SOME INFORMATION ON OUR BOND RATING. 
          WE RECENTLY WERE REVIEWED BY ALL THREE RATING AGENCIES AS PART OF OUR UPCOMING BOND SALE. 
          I'LL GIVE YOU SOME INFORMATION ON OUR BUDGET TO ACTUAL RESULTS AS WELL AS OUR ACTUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. 
          AND THEN I HAVE A COUPLE OF SLIDES FOR YOU ON, UM, ONE COMPONENT OF OUR AFFORDABILITY GOAL, THE COMPETITIVENESS METRIC PIECE OF THAT. 
          SO I HAVE RESULTS OF OUR, UM, STATUS OF OUR SYSTEM, AVERAGE RATE USING, UH, CALENDAR YEAR 2023, UH, EIA DATA. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          UM, FOR THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AT SEPTEMBER FOR OUR OPERATING RESULTS, UM, WE DID HAVE OPERATING INCOME ON A BUDGET BASIS, WHICH IS GOOD FOR THE UTILITY, BUT IT WAS UNFAVORABLE COMPARED TO OUR BUDGET BY ABOUT 6%. 
          UM, THAT TRANSLATES INTO ABOUT 24 MILLION SHORT OF WHERE WE THOUGHT WE'D BE AS OF THE END OF THE YEAR. 
          UM, AS I'VE MENTIONED IN PRIOR QUARTERS, UM, THE BIG DRIVER THERE IS OUR EFFORTS IN OUR VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM. 
          UM, YOU'LL SEE A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL ON THOSE OPERATING RESULTS IN THE PRESENTATION. 
          UH, MOVING TO THE RIGHT, UM, BOX HERE, OUR BOND RATING, AS I MENTIONED, UM, ALL THREE RATING AGENCIES VISITED WITH AUSTIN ENERGY AS PART OF OUR UPCOMING BOND SALE. 
          UM, WE'RE SELLING BONDS THIS WEEK. 
          UM, WE'RE CONVERTING COMMERCIAL PAPER TO LONG-TERM DEBT IN THE, UM, AMOUNT OF ABOUT 250 MILLION, WHICH IS A PRETTY STANDARD TRANSACTION FOR THE UTILITY FOR OUR CAPITAL PROJECTS. 
          UM, OUR AA RATING WAS AFFIRMED BY STANDARD AND POORS, UM, WHICH IS JUST A REMINDER TO YOU THAT IS UNDER OUR TARGET OF BEING AA PUBLIC POWER UTILITY FOR FINANCIAL POLICIES. 
          SORRY. 
          YEP. 
          VERY QUICK QUESTION. 
          MM-HMM, . 
          UM, CAN YOU REMIND US, IS THAT THE SAME BEFORE WE DID THE, UM, RATE CASE, THERE WAS CONCERN ABOUT OUR BOND RATING. 
          MM-HMM, . 
          SO WHERE WAS IT BEFORE THE RATE CASE AND WHERE IS IT NOW? IS IT, HAS IT NOT CHANGED? BASICALLY? SO, UM, THE LATEST MOVEMENT WAS IN, UM, MID 2022. 
          UM, WE HAD A DOWNGRADE BY, UM, S AND P AND FITCH, UM, TO AA MINUS, AND SO NO MOVEMENT SINCE THEN. 
          UM, WE DID GET AFFIRMED. 
          WE, WE ISSUED BONDS IN 2023, SO WE HAVE THE SAME RATING AS WE DID THEN. 
          UM, BUT WE DO HAVE A STABLE OUTLOOK, WHICH IS POSITIVE, UM, FOR FINANCIAL POLICIES, UH, WE'RE STILL NOT IN FULL COMPLIANCE, ALTHOUGH WE DID SEE SOME CHANGE FROM LAST QUARTER. 
          UM, I HAVE MENTIONED TO YOU BEFORE THAT OUR, UH, QUICK RATIO IS OUT OF COMPLIANCE JUST SLIGHTLY, AND THAT'S, UM, A MEASURE OF THE UTILITY'S ABILITY TO PAY OUR BILLS WITH OUR LIQUIDITY. 
          I'VE MENTIONED IN LAST QUARTERS, UM, THAT OUR LIQUIDITY WAS IN, UM, KINDA A FRAGILE STATE. 
          IT HAS BEEN. 
          SO WE'VE HAD SOME, UM, MOVEMENT ON THAT. 
          UM, I AM PLEASED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT THE DAYS CASH ON HAND HAS MET ITS MINIMUM, BUT I WILL CAUTION YOU THAT THAT'S PRIMARILY DUE TO OUR POWER SUPPLY OVER RECOVERY. 
          UM, THAT LEADS ME TO THE BOTTOM RIGHT BOX HERE. 
          UM, AS OF THE END OF SEPTEMBER, WE ARE 56 MILLION OVERCOVERED IN THAT RATE. 
          UM, LAST QUARTER I MENTIONED IT'S THE SAME STORY. 
          THIS QUARTER WE HAD LOWER COST, ESPECIALLY THIS SUMMER WE'RE STILL SEEING OVERALL MARKET PRESSURE FROM ERCOT, BUT, UM, WE DID SEE MORE MODERATE PRICES. 
          SO, UM, GOOD 
          [00:30:01]
NEWS FOR OUR CUSTOMERS IS WE'RE ABLE TO LOWER THAT RATE. 
          UM, WE HAVE DONE SO TWICE SINCE THIS PRESENTATION ENDS IN SEPTEMBER. 
          UM, WE HAD A 5% REDUCTION EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1ST AS WELL AS NOVEMBER, NOVEMBER 1ST. 
          UM, AND WE'RE LOOKING TO POTENTIALLY DECREASE THE RATE AGAIN AS OF 12 ONE 5% A LITTLE BIT MORE. 
          I WANNA BACK UP REAL QUICK ON THE, UH, DAYS CASH ON HAND, JUST TO GIVE YOU KIND OF A GAUGE OF WHERE WE'RE AT, WE'RE AT 159 DAYS AGAINST THAT TARGET OF 150 DAYS. 
          UM, WE'RE 30 MILLION ABOVE OUR TARGET. 
          AND AGAIN, 56 MILLION IS CASH THAT WE'RE HOLDING AND RETURNING TO OUR CUSTOMERS THROUGH THEIR BILLS. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          SO GOING BACK TO THAT BOND RATING, AGAIN, OUR TARGET IS A DOUBLE A RATING FROM STANDARD AND POS. 
          UM, WE'RE SITTING AT AA MINUS ON, UH, THE TOP OF THIS SLIDE. 
          I'LL RUN THROUGH FOUR METRICS THAT, UM, THE UTILITY MEASURES FOR ITSELF, UM, AND THE RATING AGENCIES ALSO REVIEW. 
          UM, FOR AUSTIN ENERGY, UM, AGAIN, OUR DAYS CASH ON HAND, WE'RE AT 159 DAYS. 
          UM, HAVE THAT IN YELLOW IS JUST A CAUTIONARY TALE THAT THAT'S GOING TO DECREASE AS RETURNING THAT, UM, POWER SUPPLY ADJUSTMENT BACK TO OUR CUSTOMERS ON DEBT SERVICE COVERAGE. 
          UM, WE HAVE SEEN PRETTY GOOD INCREASES IN OUR COVERAGE RATIO, WHICH IS VERY POSITIVE. 
          UM, THAT'S MOSTLY DUE TO THE BASE RATE INCREASES THAT WE'VE IMPLEMENTED. 
          UM, WE ARE ABOVE OUR FINANCIAL POLICY OF TWO TIMES, UM, BUT WE'RE NOT QUITE AT THAT BENCHMARK. 
          WE, UM, WOULD LIKE TO BE AT TO BE A DOUBLE A RATED UTILITY ON OUR OPERATING MARGIN. 
          THAT'S STILL SEEING, UM, A GOOD AMOUNT OF STRESS, ALTHOUGH THOSE BASE RATES HAVE REALLY IMPROVED THAT MARGIN, UM, COSTS AND INFLATION AND SOME UNFUNDED PENSION COSTS ARE REALLY PUTTING STRESS ON OUR MARGINS. 
          UM, LAST, OUR DEBT TO CAPITALIZATION. 
          WE HAVEN'T SEEN MUCH MOVEMENT HERE. 
          UM, THAT'S LIKELY TO IMPROVE, UM, AS WE KEEP, UM, OUR EARNINGS UP FOR THE UTILITY. 
          UM, BUT THAT HASN'T CHANGED MUCH IN THE PAST YEAR. 
          UM, ON THE BOTTOM OF THIS SLIDE, I'VE GIVEN YOU JUST SOME COMMENTARY FROM THE RATING AGENCIES. 
          I'VE JUST PULLED SOME, UM, INFORMATION FROM THEIR PRESS RELEASES ON AUSTIN ENERGY AS THEY REVIEWED OUR FINANCES AND OPERATIONS. 
          AGAIN, WE ARE AA MINUS, UM, AT A STABLE OUTLOOK. 
          UM, I'VE PULLED THREE RELEVANT POINTS THAT THEY MADE ABOUT AUSTIN ENERGY. 
          UM, ONE OF THE DOWNSIDE SCENARIOS WAS THAT WE HAD, UM, DELAYED COST RECOVERY AND AS I'VE MENTIONED SOME STRESS AND UM, STRAIN ON OUR LIQUIDITY BALANCES. 
          UM, THEY DO SEE CREDIT POSITIVE, UM, THE UTILITIES USE OF OUR PSA MECHANISM, WHICH I JUST MENTIONED IS THAT 5% MOVEMENT, WHICH HAS REALLY HELPED US MANAGE OUR LIQUIDITY POSITION IN THE PAST, UH, YEAR. 
          AND, UM, AS WELL AS THOSE BASE RATE INCREASES THAT WE'VE PUT INTO EFFECT, THEY'RE PLEASED THAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO DO THAT TO RECOVER COSTS MORE TIMELY AND REALLY, UM, HAVE OUR FINANCIAL POSITION IMPROVE. 
          AND LAST AN UPSIDE OR CREDIT CREDIT POSITIVE IS OUR DIVERSIFIED GENERATION PORTFOLIO. 
          UM, AND WHAT THEY VIEW IS, UM, HISTORICALLY LIMITED EXPOSURE TO THE MARKET. 
          SO ON THAT NOTE, JUST UM, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY DO SEE SOME POSITIVES WITH THE UTILITY, BUT THEY DO, UM, THEY HAVE NOTED THAT WE'RE NOT QUITE THERE YET. 
          THEY'RE LOOKING TO SEE SUSTAINED FINANCIAL STABILITY IN OUR METRICS AND OUR FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. 
          UM, STANDARD AND POOR'S MENTIONED THAT IT WOULD BE AT LEAST 24 MONTHS OR SO UNTIL WE'D SEE A POTENTIAL UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE. 
          NEXT SLIDE. 
          ONE MORE PLEASE. 
          SO I'LL RUN THROUGH REALLY QUICK OUR FUND SUMMARY. 
          THIS IS OUR BUDGET BASIS OF ACCOUNTING. 
          I HAVE HIGHLIGHTED THAT OUR OPERATING INCOME, UM, WAS LESS THAN BUDGETED, ALTHOUGH WE DID HAVE INCOME. 
          UM, THAT'S WHAT I MENTIONED IN THAT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. 
          WE WERE ABOUT 6% LESS THAN WE HOPED TO BE AS OF THE END OF THE YEAR. 
          UM, MOSTLY DUE TO VEGETATION MANAGEMENT. 
          AND I DIDN'T HIGHLIGHT ANYTHING AT THE BOTTOM, BUT I DO WANT TO NOTE THAT THAT DEFICIENCY IN OUR REVENUES OF 83 MILLION IS PRIMARILY DUE TO TRANSFERRING THAT $70 MILLION BACK TO OUR POWER SUPPLY STABILIZATION RESERVE. 
          UM, AS YOU MIGHT REMEMBER, IN 2023, UM, WE HAD TO TRANSFER FUNDS TO HELP PAY FOR A VERY EXPENSIVE POWER BILLS IN 2023. 
          SO 2024 IS, UM, MOVING THAT CASH BACK TO THE RESERVE. 
          OKAY. 
          SORRY, ONE QUICK QUESTION. 
          SURE. 
          UM, YOU MENTIONED VEGETATION MANAGEMENT. 
          DO YOU JUST MEAN 
          [00:35:01]
YOUR OTHER OPERATING EXPENSES WERE MORE THAN EXPECTED BECAUSE WE'VE SPENT A LOT MORE ON VEGETATION MANAGEMENT BECAUSE OF THE, YOU KNOW, TO CATCH UP KIND OF, IS THAT BASICALLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT. 
          OKAY. 
          YEP. 
          SO JUST UNFAVORABLE TO OUR BUDGET, ORIGINAL BUDGET, BUT IT WAS STILL A GOOD THING WE DID BUDGET. 
          GOOD THING. 
          BUT YES, IT'S CAUSING AN UNFAVORABLE VARIANCE. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          AND WHAT'S THE, WHAT'S THE TIMEFRAME FOR THIS, UM, BUDGET TO ACTUAL? IS IT, THIS IS FOR THE ENTIRE FISCAL YEAR, LAST FISCAL YEAR. 
          SORRY. 
          EXCUSE ME. 
          OKAY, GOTCHA. 
          ALRIGHT, THANKS. 
          I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT YOU. 
          YES, YOU'RE CORRECT. 
          IT'S FOR THE ENTIRE FISCAL YEAR, SO IT ENCOMPASSES OCTOBER THROUGH SEPTEMBER. 
          UM, THIS SLIDE, UH, WE NORMALLY PRESENT TO YOU JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF WHERE POWER SUPPLY COSTS SIT AGAINST OUR BUDGET. 
          UM, THE GOLD AND KIND OF DARK GRAY BARS, UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, THE, THE ACTUAL COST ARE WELL BELOW OUR BUDGET, WHICH IS, UM, A GOOD THING FOR OUR CUSTOMERS. 
          UM, SO AGAIN, JUST A KIND OF A DEPICTION OF THAT $56 MILLION OVER RECOVERY THAT WE'RE SITTING AT AS OF THE END OF SEPTEMBER. 
          UM, THAT BLUE LINE HOVERING ABOVE THE BARS IS POWER SUPPLY REVENUE THROUGH THAT PSA RATE. 
          UM, SO IT WAS DESIGNED TO BE ABOVE COST, UM, BUT WE HAVE OVERCOVERED AND AGAIN, ARE BEGINNING TO RETURN THAT TO OUR CUSTOMERS. 
          NEXT SLIDE. 
          ON CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN OR CIP, UM, I'M SHOWING YOU THAT WE ARE OVERSPENT AND CAPITAL FOR THE FISCAL YEAR. 
          WE HAD A $336 MILLION ESTIMATE IN TOTAL TO SPEND FOR THE FISCAL YEAR, AND WE'VE SPENT $360 MILLION. 
          MOST OF THAT OVERAGE, AS YOU CAN SEE, IS IN DISTRIBUTION. 
          UM, WE'VE HAD SOME ACCELERATED SPEND ON TRANSFORMER INVENTORY. 
          AS YOU'RE ALL AWARE. 
          WE PROCURED INVENTORY, UM, AND HAVE JUST SEEN INCREASED MATERIAL AND LABOR COSTS. 
          SO, UM, 107% OF SPEND FOR THE YEAR. 
          UM, WE TYPICALLY SHOW YOU HOW WE FINANCE THOSE ASSETS OR PAY FOR THOSE ASSETS IN THE PIE CHART. 
          UM, WE ARE AT A 44%, UM, CASH FUNDING, AND THAT'S IN THE FORM OF CONTRIBUTIONS FROM OUR CUSTOMERS AS WELL AS INTERNALLY GENERATED CASH FROM BASE RATES, UM, AND HAVE FUNDED 56% WITH DEBT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          FOR OUR INCOME STATEMENT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR, I HAVE HIGHLIGHTED THE $20 MILLION, UM, NET INCOME, WHICH IS, UM, THE FIRST TIME I HAVE PRESENTED A, UM, AN INCOME POSITION FOR THE UTILITY SINCE FISCAL YEAR 19. 
          UM, SO THAT'S VERY GOOD NEWS. 
          UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, THAT IS AGAINST A LOSS LAST YEAR OF 29 MILLION. 
          SO AGAIN, GREAT NEWS FOR THE UTILITY. 
          UM, THE, THE, THE FIVE YEAR PERIOD OF LOSSES IS REALLY THE, UM, DIRECT DRAIN ON OUR CASH AND LIQUIDITY. 
          AND SO WE'VE BEEN FUNDING OPERATIONS WITH RESERVES AND NOT GENERATING ANY CASH TO REPLENISH THAT. 
          SO, UM, THIS IS GOOD NEWS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR. 
          UM, FOR OUR AVERAGE NUMBER OF CUSTOMERS AND SALES. 
          UM, WE'RE A BIT ABOVE OUR TARGET AND AVERAGE NUMBER OF CUSTOMERS. 
          UM, OUR SALES ARE ACTUALLY DOWN OVER THE FISCAL YEAR, UM, AND THAT'S AGAIN JUST DUE TO THE WEATHER THAT WE EXPERIENCED LAST YEAR. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE FOR THE BALANCE SHEET. 
          UM, A LOT GOING ON HERE. 
          I THINK THE BIGGEST STORY IS JUST THE CASH, UM, GROWTH SINCE LAST FISCAL YEAR. 
          UM, THAT FIRST LINE IS ABOUT $110 MILLION INCREASE. 
          UM, OVER HALF OF THAT IS THE POWER SUPPLY ADJUSTMENT OVER RECOVERY. 
          SO, UM, THAT WILL COME OUT OF CASH AS WE RETURN IT BACK TO THE CUSTOMERS. 
          UM, BASE RATES HAVE REALLY HELPED, UM, OUR FINANCIAL POSITION AS WELL AS, UM, I THINK WE GOT ABOUT 18,000,020 MILLION IN MA RECOVERY THIS FISCAL YEAR. 
          SO THOSE COSTS WERE IN 2023 AND RECOVERED IN 2024. 
          UM, THE CHART ON THE RIGHT IS ANOTHER DEPICTION OF OUR CASH AND RESERVES THAT I MENTIONED EARLIER. 
          UM, THE BLUE LINES ARE WHERE WE SIT AS OF THE END OF SEPTEMBER. 
          AGAIN, WE'RE ABOUT 30 MILLION OVER OUR TARGET. 
          UM, BUT AGAIN, AS WE RETURN THAT CASH TO OUR CUSTOMERS AND, UM, BEGIN FISCAL YEAR 2025, WE'LL RESET TARGETS. 
          UM, WE USE, UH, BUDGET BASED COST TO DO THAT. 
          SO NOW THAT WE'RE IN OUR 2025 BUDGET, YOU'LL SEE A DIFFERENT TARGET NEXT QUARTER. 
          NEXT SLIDE. 
          AND FINALLY, WE HAVE A COUPLE OF SLIDES HERE ON THE COMPETITIVENESS METRIC. 
          UM, AS YOU KNOW, THAT PORTION OF OUR AFFORDABILITY GOAL IS FOR AUSTIN ENERGY TO STAY LOWER THAN THE TEXAS AVERAGE. 
          UM, THE, UH, THE GOOD NEWS IS FOR SYSTEM RATES WE HAVE DONE, SO 
          [00:40:01]
WE'RE AT, UH, 10.58 CENTS PER KWH. 
          UM, THIS IS CALENDAR YEAR 2023 EIA DATA. 
          UM, AND DESPITE INCURRING VERY HIGH COST IN 2023, I'M PLEASED TO REPORT THAT WE'RE STILL UNDER THE TEXAS AVERAGE BY ABOUT 2%. 
          NEXT SLIDE. 
          THIS SLIDE IS, UM, SAME INFORMATION THAT YOU JUST SAW, BUT BROKEN OUT BY CUSTOMER CLASS. 
          SO, UM, LIKE I SAID, THE FIRST TWO LINES ARE THE SYSTEM, WHICH I JUST, UM, SHOWED YOU FOR AUSTIN ENERGY AND THE STATE. 
          UM, OUR RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS ARE IN THIS NEXT SEGMENT HERE. 
          THEY ARE BELOW, UM, THE STATE AVERAGE. 
          WE'RE AT 13 CENTS VERSUS 14 AND A HALF. 
          AND OUR COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ARE ABOVE THE STATE AVERAGE, WHICH IS TYPICAL IN THE REVIEW OF THIS DATA. 
          UM, JUST GIVEN THEIR POWER BILLS HAVE SUCH AN IMPACT ON THEIR SYSTEM RATES. 
          NEXT SLIDE. 
          AND THIS IS MY LAST SLIDE JUST TO SHOW YOU THIS SAME DATA, BUT, UM, ON A RESIDENTIAL AVERAGE MONTHLY BILL COMPARISON, UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, AUSTIN ENERGY IS ABOUT AT $114 VERSUS, UM, THE STATE AVERAGE OF 167 OR $68. 
          UM, THAT'S REALLY DRIVEN BY THOSE LOWER RATES AND LOW CONSUMPTION. 
          UM, OUR RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS USED ONLY 878 KILOWATT HOURS COMPARED TO THE TEXAS AVERAGE OF 1157. 
          SO IT'S REALLY KEEPING OUR BILLS LOW FOR OUR CUSTOMERS. 
          NEXT SLIDE. 
          THAT CONCLUDES MY FINANCIAL PRESENTATION. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          CHAIR TITLE, YOU READY FOR ME TO GO? 
          [7. Staff briefing on the Fourth Quarter Operations Report by Lisa Martin, Deputy General Manager and Chief Operating Officer.]
ALL RIGHT. 
          GOOD EVENING, CHAIR, TUTTLE, VICE CHAIR, WHITE AND COMMISSIONERS. 
          I'M LISA BARTON, AUSTIN ENERGY'S, UH, CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER, AND I'M HERE TO PRESENT TO THE Q4 FISCAL YEAR 24 UPDATE. 
          THIS IS FOR THE MONTHS OF JULY, AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER OF 2024. 
          NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. 
          STANDARD AGENDA, NEXT SLIDE. 
          UM, AS A QUICK SUMMARY, UH, WE HAVE 34% RENEWABLE PRODUCTION AND 53% CARBON FREE PRODUCTION, UH, MEASURED BOTH AS A PERCENTAGE OF LOAD FOR THIS QUARTER. 
          OUR GENERATORS WERE READILY AVAILABLE, UH, WITH LIMITED DURATION OFFLINE, AND OUR RELIABILITY TRENDS CONTINUE TO REMAIN STABLE. 
          I'LL DESCRIBE THOSE IN THE NEXT SLIDES. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          WE'LL START WITH OUR ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE. 
          AND HERE YOU SEE FOR THE SUMMER, UM, BROKEN OUT BY MONTH, BUT THE, THE SUMMER MONTHS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE, THE CARBON FREE GENERATION AS A PERCENTAGE OF LOAD AVERAGED 53%. 
          UM, THIS IS A, UH, REDUCTION, UH, PRIMARILY DUE TO MUCH HIGHER LOAD REQUIREMENTS IN OUR SERVICE TERRITORY. 
          UM, BUT ALSO THIS WAS A SUMMER THAT HAD LESS SUNNY AND WINDY DAYS, UM, CERTAINLY THAN WE HAD THIS TIME LAST YEAR. 
          UM, AND YOU'LL SEE THAT ON THE NEXT SLIDE. 
          PLEASE, VERY QUICK QUESTION. 
          YES. 
          UM, DO WE, AS PART OF THE RENEWABLE PERCENTAGE, DO WE LOOK AT, UM, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE'S INDIVIDUAL SYSTEMS? SO, WELL, HE'S NOT HERE ANYMORE. 
          CRAIG NEER SAID HE HAS, YOU KNOW, 10, UH, 10 PANELS ON HIS HOUSE. 
          WOULD THE, WOULD, WOULD THE VALUE OF SOLAR THAT YOU PAY, WOULD THOSE BE FIGURED INTO THAT RENEWABLE OR DO YOU NOT LOOK AT, ARE YOU ASKING IF THE RESIDENTIAL BEHIND THE METER AND COMMERCIAL BEHIND THE METER SOLAR IS INCORPORATED INTO THESE NUMBERS? YEAH, MICHAEL, YES. 
          YES. 
          OKAY, GREAT. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          SO THE BAR CHART YOU SAW ON THE LAST SLIDE IS SHOWN IN THE JAGGED LINE HERE, BUT THIS SHOWS MANY YEARS. 
          YOU CAN SEE THAT IT, IT DOES FLUCTUATE THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. 
          UM, AND THEN THE, UH, ROLLING 12 MONTH AVERAGE IS THE SMOOTH LINE. 
          AND YOU COULD SEE THAT FOR THIS SAME QUARTER, UH, IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS, OUR AVERAGE IS, UH, 66% CARBON REGENERATION AS A PERCENTAGE OF LOAD. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          ONE MORE. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          UH, GOING INTO OUR ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATION OPERATIONS, UM, THE OVERALL CHARGING NETWORK, SO LEVEL TWO AND DC FAST HAD AN UPTIME OF 96% LAST QUARTER. 
          THE DC FAST CHARGING ALONE, UM, HAD A CUMULATIVE UPTIME OF JUST UNDER 85%. 
          THAT IS A DROP. 
          UM, THERE WAS SOME, UM, VANDALISM CONNECTIVITY AND, UH, NON AE SWITCHGEAR, UM, THAT IMPACTED A FEW KEY STATIONS FOR A PERIOD. 
          UM, ALTHOUGH I'M HAPPY TO, THAT THE TEAM HAS REPORTED ALMOST ALL REPAIRS HAVE BEEN MADE. 
          UM, ALTHOUGH THEY'RE AWAITING A FEW PARTS, UM, 
          [00:45:01]
TO BRING THAT UP TO NORMAL LEVELS, UM, OUR TEAMS CONTINUE TO BE ACTIVELY ENGAGED WITH, UH, THE VENDORS TO PERFORM MAINTENANCE, WHETHER THAT'S PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE OR REACTIVE MAINTENANCE AS NECESSARY. 
          AND THEN THE PIE CHART SHOWS, UM, A COLLECTIVE, UH, 99.1%, UM, AVAILABILITY. 
          THAT'S THE ORANGE PLUS GRAY TOGETHER. 
          UM, ONLY 0.9% OF THE STATIONS WERE RECOGNIZED AS FAULTED, UM, AT THE TIME OF THIS SNAPSHOT. 
          AND THAT'S ABOUT 14 PORTS. 
          NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. 
          THESE NUMBERS ARE SLOWLY TRENDING UPWARD IN TERMS OF AVERAGE CHARGING SESSIONS PER MONTH. 
          UM, SO WE'RE AT 34,500, UH, CHARGING SESSIONS IN THE MONTH. 
          UM, AN AVERAGE OF, UH, 681 MEGAWATT HOURS DISPENSED. 
          UM, THE PEAK USAGE TIME CONTINUES TO BE IN THE MORNING AND EARLY AFTERNOON, AND THE CHARGING TIME, UH, CONTINUES TO BE A SESSION LENGTH OF JUST OVER FIVE HOURS WITH THE ACTUAL TIME THAT IT'S CHARGING VEHICLES JUST UNDER THREE HOURS. 
          MOVING ON TO GENERATOR AVAILABILITY, SO THIS IS THE TIME OF YEAR WHEN WE ARE LOOKING TO SEE, UH, TO WHEN THE CENTER TARGETS ARE TRUE. 
          THESE ARE OUR SUMMER TARGETS. 
          UM, AND YOU CAN SEE THAT BOTH THE SANDHILL COMBINED CYCLE AND THE FAYETTE PLANT, UM, EITHER MET OR EXCEEDED THEIR TARGET. 
          UM, THE NUCLEAR PLANT AT SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT, UH, WAS JUST BELOW ITS, UM, SUMMER TARGET. 
          THERE WAS A, UM, EQUIPMENT FAILURE, WELL, YEAH, DUE TO THAT CAUSED A FIRE IN THE SWITCHYARD THAT CAUSED THE UNIT TO TRIP OFFLINE. 
          AND SO, UH, THE UNIT WAS OUT FOR, UM, A LITTLE BIT OF TIME DURING THIS QUARTER. 
          AND LISA, WE DON'T SHOW THE PEAKER UNITS. 
          WE DON'T, I DON'T QUITE KNOW WHY WE CAN. 
          IT'D BE INTERESTING TO KNOW TO WHAT EXTENT. 
          I KNOW THEY'RE NOT USED AS MUCH, BUT, YOU KNOW, ARE THEY AVAILABLE? THEY'RE AVAILABILITY. 
          YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          I WILL MAKE A NOTE. 
          UM, ALL RIGHT, SO LOOKING AT OUR GENERATION AND LOAD ANALYSIS, UM, IN THE UPPER LEFT, THE FUEL COST METRICS, UH, CONTINUE TO SHOW SIGNIFICANT USE OF CARBON FREE SOURCES AT NINE, UH, 73%. 
          THAT'S THE ORANGE PLUS THE YELLOW, UM, GOING DOWN THE SYSTEM, PEAK DEMAND WAS HIGHER IN Q4 DURING THIS FISCAL YEAR AT 3,110 MEGAWATTS. 
          UM, THEN DURING THE Q4 OF THE LAST FISCAL YEAR, SO THAT NUMBER ON THE CHART ON 2023 IS 3064 MEGAWATTS. 
          THE BAR CHART IN THE TOP RIGHT SHOWS GENERATION FOR THE QUARTER, TOTALING ABOUT 3.4 MILLION MEGAWATT HOURS, WHICH IS SIMILAR TO WHAT WE SAW LAST QUARTER. 
          UM, AND THEN CONSUMPTION FOR THE QUARTER IS JUST OVER 4.4 MILLION MEGAWATT HOURS, WHICH IS CONSIDERABLY HIGHER THAN LAST QUARTER. 
          UM, SOMETIMES I LIKE TO COMPARE THIS AGAINST QUARTER OVER QUARTER AND SOMETIMES YEAR OVER YEAR. 
          UM, AND SO, UH, WHAT YOU SEE HERE, UM, LAST, UH, YEAR, THIS TIME THE RENEWABLE PERCENTAGE WAS 41%. 
          WHAT YOU SEE HERE, THE ORANGE OVER THE BLUE IS 34%. 
          UM, THERE WAS, UH, CLOSE TO, UM, HALF, HALF A MILLION, 400 MILLION MEGAWATT HOURS, LOWER RENEWABLE GENERATION. 
          UM, AND SO WE SAW A MUCH LOWER RENEWABLE PERCENTAGE OF THIS TIME THAN LAST TIME. 
          AND, AND AS I MENTIONED, UM, A LOT OF THAT WAS JUST DUE TO IT BEING LESS WINDY AND LESS SUNNY THIS, UM, QUARTER THIS YEAR THAN LAST YEAR. 
          UM, THERE WAS SOME CURTAILMENT AS WELL. 
          UM, AND THEN, UM, ANYWAYS, THAT ALL TOTALS TO OUR, UM, CARBON FREE PERCENTAGE THAT WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER OF, UM, 53% OVERALL, THE ORANGE PLUS THE YELLOW AT THE BOTTOM. 
          SO DO YOU EXPECT THAT TO BE CONTINUING? I KNOW YOU CAN'T PREDICT THE WEATHER NECESSARILY, BUT I REMEMBER OLD CHARTS OF THAT SAME TYPE THAT, YOU KNOW, AE WAS TARGETING JUST BEING A SLIGHT BIT LONG AND HERE WE ARE MEANINGFUL AMOUNT SHORT. 
          YEAH, I MEAN, THERE'S THREE DIFFERENT, UM, FACTORS COMING INTO PLAY HERE, AND THAT'S LOAD GROWTH IS GOING UP, AND THEN IF THE, UM, YOU KNOW, WEATHER DEPENDENT AND THEN, UH, CAN WE GET THE RENEWABLE GENERATION FROM WHERE IT'S LOCATED TO, TO HERE. 
          UM, AND SO I, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE HAVE TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION ALL OF THOSE FACTORS. 
          OTHERWISE OUR, UH, CARBON FREE AS A PERCENTAGE OF LOAD WILL, WILL DECREASE AS WE'VE SEEN IT IN THE LAST, YOU COULD SEE IT ON THAT, THAT TRENDING TRENDING CHART EARLIER. 
          COULD YOU JUST SAY THAT NUMBER AGAIN IN THE REDUCED, UH, PRODUCTION FROM RENEWABLES? JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I SURE. 
          YEAH. 
          IT'S ABOUT 400,000, UH, MEGAWATT HOURS, LOWER RENEWABLE GENERATION. 
          THIS THE NUMBER THAT'S IN ORANGE THERE, 
          [00:50:01]
UM, THIS YEAR THAN LAST YEAR. 
          SO IT WAS CLOSE TO 2 MILLION. 
          CAN YOU TELL US HOW MUCH OF THAT WAS CURTAILMENT VERSUS WEATHER? DO YOU WANNA COME, MIKE? YEAH, MIKE'S GONNA COME GIVE YOU SOME DETAILS. 
          COOL. 
          THANKS. 
          . 
          YEAH. 
          UM, SO DEFINITELY, SO I WOULD SAY ACTUALLY, OH, SORRY. 
          UH, MICHAEL LANGER, VICE PRESIDENT ENERGY MARKET OPERATIONS AND RESOURCE PLANNING. 
          SO ACTUALLY WE SAW MORE CURTAILMENT LAST QUARTER, OR Q4 OF FISCAL YEAR 2023, I THINK WHERE WE SAW A LOT LESS GENERATION. 
          THE MAJORITY OF IT WAS DOWN AT THE SOUTH AND COASTAL WIND. 
          WE ACTUALLY SAW WIND SPEEDS ON AVERAGE WERE ABOUT 23% LOWER THAN THE, THAT SAME QUARTER. 
          THE YEAR BEFORE THAT WAS DOWN IN BROWNSVILLE AREA, SO DOWN MORE IN THE SOUTH. 
          IT WAS ACTUALLY MUCH HIGHER UP IN THE CORPUS AREA, WHICH IS MORE OF OUR COASTAL WIND. 
          THERE'S A PROXY FOR IT. 
          I THINK IT WAS CLOSER TO 34% LOWER. 
          AND THEN WE ACTUALLY SAW IN AUSTIN, WE ACTUALLY SAW, UH, ABOUT 20,000 MEGAWATTS LESS JUST FROM EAST BLACKLAND OVER HERE. 
          AND THAT HAD TO DO WITH INCREASED CLOUD COVER. 
          WE ACTUALLY HAD ABOUT 82% HIGHER CLOUD COVER OVER THOSE THREE MONTH PERIOD IN THE AUSTIN AREA THAN WE SAW THAT PREVIOUS QUARTER. 
          SO THE ONLY PLACE I SAW REALLY MORE CURTAILMENT HAPPENING, UH, WAS OUT IN FAR FAR WEST TEXAS AT OUR AIRBORNE FACILITY. 
          AND WE ACTUALLY SAW NEGATIVE INTERVALS, UH, ABOUT TWO AND A HALF TIMES GREATER OVER THAT TIME PERIOD OUT THERE. 
          SO, UH, MOSTLY WEATHER WITH THE EXCEPTION OF A COUPLE AREAS WAS MORE CURTAILMENT. 
          THANKS. 
          AND YOU SAID THAT WAS A SOLAR FACILITY GETTING CURTAILED OR IS THAT YEAH. 
          OUT IN AOR? YES. 
          THAT'S A SOLAR FACILITY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          SURE. 
          IS THAT A, IS THAT LIKE A EL NINO LA NINA TYPE PHENOMENON OR A TRENDING TYPE? I MEAN, I, I'D BE HAPPY TO PULL DATA, BUT, UM, I THINK, I DON'T THINK IT'S REALLY TIED TO EL NINO, LA NINA. 
          UH, THEY WOULD PROBABLY TRY TO ASSOCIATE IT, BUT THEN YOU HAVE WEAK EL NINOS, MODERATE EL NINOS AND STRONG EL NINOS, AND EACH ONE OF THOSE WILL SEE SOMETHING SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT. 
          UM, BUT YOU'LL JUST HAVE DIFFERENT WIND PATTERNS IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE STATE YEAR OVER YEAR AND DIFFERENT, UH, SOLAR PATTERNS AND CLOUD COVER YEAR OVER YEAR IN DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE STATE. 
          SO IN WEST TEXAS, FOR EXAMPLE, WE DIDN'T SEE, UH, THAT MUCH LOWER SOLAR. 
          WE ACTUALLY SAW SOLAR RELATIVELY CLOSE TO, WE SAW, UH, THE QUARTER OF THAT PREVIOUS FISCAL YEAR. 
          SO IT KIND OF DEPENDS ON THE AREA AS WELL. 
          SO LIKE I SAID, MOST OF IT CAME FROM LOWER WIND IN SOUTH TEXAS AND THE COASTAL AREA, AND IT WAS NOT DUE TO CURTAILMENT. 
          WE ACTUALLY SAW MORE NEGATIVE PRICING IN 2023 IN THAT AREA THAN WE DID IN 2024. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          UH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          MOVING TO OUR WIRE SIDE, DISTRIBUTION RELIABILITY. 
          UM, AND SO, UM, OUR, UH, Q4 NUMBERS ARE IN THE ORANGE BARS. 
          UM, AGAIN, WE LIKE TO COMPARE THAT TO THE TEXAS AVERAGE. 
          UM, THE TEXAS AVERAGE NUMBERS ARE STILL FOR, UH, CALENDAR YEAR 2022. 
          UM, THAT'S THE LATEST THAT EIA HAS POSTED, ALTHOUGH THEY HAVE, UM, RELEASED FINAL DATA AND I'M HOPEFUL THAT WE'LL BE MOVING TO, UH, 23 SOON. 
          UM, AND THEN WE LIKE TO LOOK AT OUR TREND LINES. 
          UM, OH, SO YOU CAN SEE FOR A, COMPARED TO THE REST OF THE STATE ARE, UM, BOTH THE NUMBER OF OUTAGES AND THE DURATION OF OUR OUTAGES, UM, IS CONSIDERABLY LESS. 
          AND OF COURSE LESS IS BETTER. 
          UM, WHEN IT COMES TO OUTAGES, UH, IN TERMS OF OUR TREND LINES, YOU CAN SEE THAT FOR ALL THREE OF THE METRICS, UH, THE TREND LINES, UM, ARE LOWER THAN THEY HAVE BEEN IN THE PAST ABOUT A YEAR AGO. 
          UM, AND, UH, THEY CONTINUE TO REMAIN STABLE. 
          AND THEN LAST SLIDE IS AN UPDATE ON OUR, UM, GRID RESILIENCE INITIATIVES FROM A STRATEGIC PLAN PERSPECTIVE. 
          UM, UNDER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM RELIABILITY, THERE'S A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT, UM, FACTORS UNDERWAY. 
          WE OFTEN TALK ABOUT OUR WORK ON, UM, END-TO-END FEEDER, UH, HARDENING. 
          UM, AND SO THERE ARE 25 CIRCUITS THAT ARE UNDERWAY AND NINE CIRCUITS WHICH HAVE BEEN FULLY COMPLETED, UM, AS OF THE, UH, AS OF OCTOBER. 
          AND THEN, UM, OUR OVERHEAD HARDENING AND UNDERGROUND FEASIBILITY STUDY IS STILL ON TRACK TO BE COMPLETED AT THE END OF THIS YEAR. 
          AND I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN EAGER TO GET AN UPDATE ON THAT. 
          UH, AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR, I AM PLEASED TO SAY THAT, UM, WE HAVE HEARD THAT WE WILL BE AWARDED A, A TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF, UH, EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT GRID RESILIENCY GRANT, UM, ONE FOR VEGETATION MANAGEMENT AND ONE FOR WILDFIRE MITIGATION IMPROVEMENTS. 
          UM, TOTALING BETWEEN 25 TO $30 MILLION, UM, OVER TO, UH, IN TOTAL OVER FIVE YEARS. 
          UM, AND SO WE'RE REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THAT. 
          UM, ON THE FLIP SIDE, WE DID NOT RECEIVE THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY GRIP GRANT 2.0 APPLICATION THAT WE SUBMITTED. 
          UM, WE RECEIVED NOTIFICATION IN OCTOBER, AND THEN I THINK EVERYONE KNOWS THAT OUR PANEL AI DEPLOYMENT IS FULLY OUT THERE AND WORKING AS EXPECTED. 
          UM, WE CONTINUE TO WORK ON THE OTHER TWO PROJECTS ON HERE REGARDING, UM, IMPROVING OUR UNDERGROUND NETWORK 
          [00:55:01]
MODELING THAT'S RELATED TO A GIS UPGRADE AND MAKING MORE, UM, VISIBILITY FOR OUR, OUR OPERATORS AND OUR, UM, CREWS. 
          AND THEN OUR RESILIENCY AS A SERVICE PROGRAM CONTINUES TO, UM, MOVE FORWARD AND MAKE HEADWAY. 
          WE'RE IN DISCUSSIONS WITH A NUMBER OF, UH, CRITICAL FACILITIES ACROSS THE CITY ON THE, UM, ON THE RAZ PROGRAM. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , WHAT IS THE RANGE OF SIZE OF BACKUP GENERATORS? I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE ABLE TO REVEAL THAT, BUT IS, I'VE GOT MOST ONE MEGAWATT. 
          IS IT, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT SIZE ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? YEAH. 
          THESE UNITS, UM, ARE, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEY, THEY COME IN 400 KILOWATT MODULAR UNITS AND SO MOST TIMES IT'S EITHER 800 KILOWATTS OR 1.2 MEGAWATTS, UM, YOU KNOW, FOR, SAY FOR A GROCERY STORE. 
          UM, AND THEN, UH, THAT, THAT'S THE KIND OF SIZE WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE, UM, FOR MOST OF OUR DEPLOYMENTS. 
          AND, AND THUS FAR, HAVE THEY ALL BEEN, UM, GAS GENERATORS? HAS ANYONE SUGGESTED COMBINING GAS WITH OTHER RESOURCES OR? THE RAS PROGRAM RIGHT NOW IS NATURAL GAS GENERATORS, UM, WITH THE BENEFIT OF PREVENTING DIESEL GENERATORS AS AS BACKUP. 
          UM, AND THEN THERE IS, THERE ARE PLANS TO, UH, FURTHER THAT TO INCLUDE BATTERIES IN THE FUTURE. 
          THANKS. 
          UM, WAS THAT A CHANGE SINCE WE GOT OUR LAST PRESENTATION ON THAT? 'CAUSE I REMEMBER ASKING IF SOLAR AND BATTERY WERE PART OF IT AND THE ANSWER WAS YES. 
          SO YOU'RE SAYING THEY'RE NOT EVEN ALLOWED TO. 
          I'M GONNA PULL UP, I'M GONNA CALL A FRIEND HERE 'CAUSE I MIGHT HAVE SPOKEN INCORRECTLY. 
          WE'LL HAVE SARAH NORRIS COME UP. 
          THANK YOU. 
          GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS, DIRECTOR OF SARAH NORRIS, DIRECTOR OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY SERVICES, WHICH INCLUDES THE RAZ PROGRAM. 
          SO TO DATE, THE STRUCTURE OF THE RAZ PROGRAM DOES NOT INCLUDE, UM, BATTERIES OR SOLAR AND STORAGE, BUT ONE OF THE GRIP GRANT, UM, APPLICATIONS THAT WE SUBMITTED HAD A FRAMEWORK FOR WHAT A RAZ FOR BATTERIES WOULD LOOK LIKE. 
          AND IT IS IN THE PIPELINE FOR DEVELOPMENT. 
          SO THE SORT OF VALUATION FRAMEWORK THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE FOR THE CURRENT RAZ PROGRAM IS TARGETED TOWARDS NATURAL GAS, AS LISA NOTED SPECIFICALLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF AVOIDING DIESEL GENERATORS GOING IN. 
          UM, BUT QUICK ON THE HEELS OF THAT, WE ARE WORKING THROUGH WHAT THE VALUATION WOULD LOOK LIKE 'CAUSE IT WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT, THE VALUATION THAN THE DISPATCH SCHEMA FOR A BATTERY BASED PROGRAM. 
          AND, AND YOU KNOW THIS, BUT JUST, UM, THERE ARE FOLKS WORKING AT THE STATE LEVEL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT RULES FOR GRANTS FOR, UM, BACKUP POWER PACKAGES THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO INCLUDE GAS STORAGE AND SOLAR OR EVEN, YOU KNOW, EV BUSES AS ALTERNATIVES. 
          SO I'M SURE YOU'RE AWARE OF THAT, BUT THERE ARE PEOPLE LOOKING AT THAT, LOOKING AT THAT ISSUE RIGHT NOW, SORT OF HOW DO WE COMBINE THOSE TECHNOLOGIES. 
          YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. 
          AND I'LL SHARE WITH YOU THAT THE GRIP TWO APPLICATION, WE SUBMITTED TWO ACTUALLY. 
          SO ONE WAS TOPIC TWO, I WON'T GO INTO DETAILS, BUT WAS LOOKING AT, UM, WHAT WOULD IT, WHAT WOULD A STRUCTURE LOOK LIKE FOR KIND OF A MICROGRID, IF YOU WILL, LIKE, WHERE YOU HAVE MULTIPLE DIFFERENT TYPES OF DERS ON A SITE WHERE IT COULD INCLUDE NATURAL GAS, BATTERY AND SOLAR. 
          UM, SO THAT WAS SORT OF THE TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY SUITE THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT GETTING FUNDED THROUGH THE GRIP GRANT, BUT THE FRAMEWORK THAT WAS DEVELOPED FOR THAT GRANT MAY BE APPLICABLE FOR OTHER GRANTS, AND WE HAVE BEEN KEEPING AN EYE ON THAT. 
          UM, THE DER, UH, STUFF THAT'S COMING OUT FROM THE STATE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU, SARAH. 
          YEAH, AND JUST TO CLARIFY, SARAH DID BRING UP A GOOD POINT. 
          SO WHEN I PUT UP HERE THAT WE DID NOT, WE WERE UNSUCCESSFUL FOR OUR DOE GRIP GRANT, THAT'S THE ONE ASSOCIATED WITH THE DISTRIBUTION CIRCUIT END END HARDENING. 
          UM, THAT'S THE ONE THAT WE HEARD, UM, WE WERE NOT SUCCESSFUL ON. 
          I DUNNO IF WE'VE HEARD ABOUT THE OTHER ONE. 
          OH, OKAY. 
          . 
          TOO BAD. 
          ALL RIGHT, I THINK THAT'S MY LAST SLIDE. 
          WOULD YOU CLICK FORWARD, DAVID? YEP. 
          ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COULD WE PAUSE FOR A FEW MINUTES? UH, SURE. 
          GET JOSH BACK. 
          NOT A PROBLEM. 
          OKAY. 
          CAN I RUN TO THE RESTROOM TOO? YOU BET. 
          , THIS MIGHT BE ALL JUST, UH, 
          [01:00:03]
RIGHT. 
          YEAH, NO, I KNOW. 
          SO YOU WERE GOOD TO TRY TO CLARIFY THAT. 
          UM, SO WE JUST MET POOL IN MAY ABOUT TOMORROW TILL, DO WE WANNA GO TO LUNCH WITH ROBIN OR DO WE LIKE, IF YOU'RE NOT COMING IN AND OH, COME ON HERE, YOU'LL BE HERE ANYWAY. 
          OKAY. 
          I GUESS I WAS THINKING WE WERE SAYING WE'RE GONNA COME IN FOR RC LATER. 
          UM, WELL, WHAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE TO LARGE SCALE, THAT'S YOUR PHONE. 
          OKAY. 
          NOW WE'RE GONNA WAIT FOR BOB . 
          WHAT ABOUT BOB? WAITING FOR BOB? YOU'LL MA YOU'LL MADE ME AFRAID I BROKE QUORUM AGAIN BY, WELL, IT'S OKAY. 
          WELL, I GUESS LET'S JUST GO. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT, . 
          GOOD EVENING AGAIN. 
          LISA MARTIN 
          [8. Staff briefing and process update on the Resource, Generation, and Climate Protection Plan by Lisa Martin, Deputy General Manager and Chief Operating Officer.]
AUSTIN ENERGY'S CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER HERE TO PRESENT TO YOU, UM, WHAT I HOPE IS THE FINAL UPDATE ON THE, UH, RESOURCE GENERATION AND CLIMATE PROTECTION PLAN PRIOR TO YOUR VOTE. 
          UM, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          SO YOU'VE SEEN THIS SLIDE SEVERAL TIMES AND IT'S JUST A REMINDER FOR ME TO TALK ABOUT HOW WE TOGETHER ARE BUILDING OUR BRIDGE TO OUR ENERGY FUTURE. 
          AND WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE DEPENDS ON ALL OF OUR COLLECTIVE WORK AND THE WORK WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS. 
          UM, AND I TODAY, UM, MY HOPE IS TO SPEND A LOT OF TIME GETTING, HAVING DISCUSSION WITH YOU, BUT I ALSO WANNA SUMMARIZE WHAT WE'VE, UM, DONE TO DATE. 
          AND SO, UH, THAT'S THE START OF MY PRESENTATION. 
          SO, UM, NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. 
          IF I HAD TO, OH, THAT'S A LITTLE BIT HARD TO READ. 
          LET ME READ IT TO YOU. 
          IF I HAD TO SUMMARIZE THE, UH, MISSION OF THE PLAN IN A SINGLE SENTENCE, I WOULD SAY THAT WE MUST MEET AUSTIN'S RISING ENERGY NEEDS WHILE ENABLING AN EQUITABLE CLEAN ENERGY TRANSITION, AND ONE THAT REFLECTS OUR COMMUNITY'S VALUES OF RELIABILITY, AFFORDABILITY, AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY. 
          ESSENTIALLY, WE NEED A PLAN THAT POWERS AUSTIN ENERGY INTO THE FUTURE AND KEEPS TRUE TO THE VALUES AND SPIRIT THAT MAKE AUSTIN UNIQUELY AUSTIN. 
          NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. 
          SO WE'VE SPENT A LOT OF TIME TALKING ABOUT OUR CURRENT DAY CHALLENGES. 
          YOU ARE VERY WELL AWARE OF THEM. 
          UM, THEY'RE EVERYTHING FROM, UH, WHAT WE'VE BEEN HEARING ABOUT FROM OUR, UH, COMMUNITY, UH, SPEAKERS TODAY, UM, INCREASED TO EXTREME WEATHER AND CLIMATE RISK. 
          UM, WE KNOW THAT THERE'S GREAT GROWTH IN POPULATION, UM, AND ENERGY CONSUMPTION, DATA CENTERS, AI, ELECTRIC VEHICLES, ELECTRIC APPLIANCES AND THE LIKE. 
          ALSO GROWTH IN POPULATION. 
          UM, WE'VE TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT REPLACING OUR LOCAL POWER GENERATION FROM, UM, RECENT PLANT RETIREMENTS AND ALSO, UM, A LOT OF CHANGES IN THE ERCOT MARKET, UM, 
          [01:05:01]
UH, INCLUDING SOME TRANSMISSION CONGESTION. 
          WE CALL THAT LOW ZONE PRICE SEPARATION A LOT. 
          THERE'S, UM, VOLATILE PRICING AND THEN FINANCIAL RISK, WHICH REALLY HAS TO DO WITH, UM, LIQUIDITY RISK OR MAKING SURE WE HAVE ENOUGH CASH ON HAND TO SETTLE UP WITH ERCOT WHEN, UM, EXTREME EVENTS OCCUR. 
          NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. 
          IF I HAD TO SUMMARIZE IN A SLIDE HOW WE GOT HERE, UM, THERE'S A BIT OF A STORY TO TELL. 
          AND SO WALK WITH ME FROM THIS TIMELINE STARTING ON THE, UH, LEFT HAND SIDE. 
          THE LAST PLAN, THE PLAN THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY UNDER WAS ADOPTED IN, UH, MARCH OF 2020, SO JUST FOUR YEARS AGO. 
          AND THE WORLD'S, UH, FROM AN ENERGY PERSPECTIVE WAS VERY, VERY DIFFERENT BACK THEN. 
          UM, SO THE PLAN WAS ADOPTED AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THAT PLAN DID WAS IT REAFFIRMED OUR COMMITMENT TO RETIRE THE DECKER STEAM UNITS. 
          THEY WERE OLD, IT WAS TIME TO RETIRE THEM. 
          UH, THEY WERE KIND OF LIMPING ALONG. 
          UM, AND SO WE RETIRED THE FIRST ONE AFTER THE SUMMER OF 2020 THAT WAS 300 MEGAWATTS. 
          AND THEN THAT NEXT SUMMER WE HAD WINTER STORM ERIE HIT AND THAT CHANGED THE ERCOT MARKET IN MANY DIFFERENT, MANY WAYS, UM, AND CERTAINLY INCREASED ENERGY COSTS. 
          UM, WE WERE SCHEDULED TO RETIRE THE SECOND DECKER STEAM UNIT AFTER THE SUMMER OF 21. 
          UM, BUT GIVEN THE, UH, SITUATION WITH WINTER STORM URI, WE WANTED TO KEEP THAT GENERATION AROUND THROUGH THE NEXT WINTER. 
          AND SO WE DID AND WE RETIRED DECKER STEAM UNIT TWO IN MARCH OF 22, RIGHT AFTER THE WINTER PERIOD, UM, TOGETHER THAT WAS 725 MEGAWATTS OF LOCAL GENERATION, UM, THAT WAS THERE WHEN WE NEEDED IT. 
          AND THAT WAS ABOUT 50% OF THE LOCAL DISPATCHABLE GENERATION WITHIN OUR SERVICE TERRITORY. 
          UM, RIGHT AROUND THAT TIME AND, AND AROUND IT, WE, WE STARTED SEEING, UM, INCREASED CONGESTION, UH, ACROSS THE STATE, UM, IN TERMS OF, UH, YOU KNOW, TRANSMISSION THAT WOULD, DID NOT ALLOW ALL OF THE RENEWABLE POWER TO COME INTO OUR SERVICE TERRITORY. 
          AND WE SAW, UM, EXTREME CONGESTION COSTS IN 2022, TOTALING $135 MILLION, AND THEN IT WAS EVEN WORSE IN 2023 AT $150 MILLION. 
          UM, JUST, I THINK WE'VE ALL TALKED ABOUT THE ERCOT MARKET AND HOW IT WORKS A LOT, BUT THIS IS THE ERCOT MARKET TELLING US THAT WE HAVE LOCAL RELIABILITY ISSUES, UM, THAT THERE'S AN INCREASE OF OUTAGE RISKS. 
          THIS IS WHEN YOU'RE SITTING THERE ON THE EDGE BETWEEN, UM, BETWEEN HAVING, UH, YOU KNOW, POWER ON OR POWER OFF. 
          AND, UM, THAT TRANSMISSION CONGESTION IS AN INCREASED COST THAT IS PASSED THROUGH TO OUR CUSTOMERS THROUGH THE PSA RATE. 
          UM, SO THEY'RE PAYING A LOT AND JUST FOR, UM, RELATIVE, UH, COMPARISON. 
          UH, THESE NUMBERS ARE ABOUT THREE TIMES HIGHER THAN THE ANNUAL CONGESTION COSTS THAT WE SAW PRIOR TO, UM, PRIOR TO THIS TIME. 
          AND THEN IN RECENT YEARS, WE'VE SEEN INCREASED, UH, PEAK DEMAND RECORDS THAT WE DON'T EXPECT TO SLOW DOWN. 
          AND SO YOU CAN'T POINT TO ANY ONE CHANGE OR SITUATION THAT PUTS US IN THE, UH, CURRENT STATE THAT WE'RE IN. 
          BUT WHEN WE SAY THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE, UH, RELIABILITY AND AFFORDABILITY RISK, THIS HELPS TO PAINT A PICTURE OF THAT. 
          AND THOSE RISKS PUT US AT RISK OF REACHING OUR, OUR CLEAN ENERGY GOALS AS WELL. 
          AND SO WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN DO ALL OF THOSE THINGS TOGETHER, UM, AS WE MOVE FORWARD TO, TO 2035. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. 
          SO, IT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO ADAPT. 
          WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO CHANGE WITH THE CHANGING ENERGY LANDSCAPE, AND WE REALLY DO WANNA EXPAND UPON THE ACHIEVEMENTS OF EVERY GENERATION CLIMATE PROTECTION PLAN THAT WE'VE HAD TO DATE. 
          UM, BUT OUR MISSION IS TO SAFELY DELIVER CLEAN, AFFORDABLE, AND RELIABLE ENERGY. 
          AND SO THE TIME TO ACT IS NOW AND WE NEED TO, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT THIS PLAN IS SET TO DO. 
          ALRIGHT, SO NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          WHEN WE BEGAN, UM, WITH EARNEST AT THE BE, UH, EARLIER THIS YEAR, UM, ON OUR RESET TO THE 2035 PLAN, WE DID A LOT OF WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY AND A NUMBER OF COMMUNITY STAKE, UM, AND INDUSTRY EXPERTS, STAKEHOLDERS. 
          UM, AND SO YOU'VE SEEN THIS SLIDE BEFORE. 
          UM, JUST A QUICK SUMMARY OF EVERYONE THAT HAS BEEN INVOLVED, UM, FROM THE INDUSTRY SIDE. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          AND THIS SLIDE REPRESENTS ALL THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN REPRESENTED IN THE COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDER WORK GROUP. 
          THERE'S 40 DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS HERE, AND COLLECTIVELY THEY REPRESENT, UH, THE DIVERSE VOICES OF THOUSANDS OF AUSTINITES. 
          UM, AND WE'VE MET FIVE TIMES OVER THE LAST SIX MONTHS. 
          UM, WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME TALKING ABOUT THE CHALLENGES WE FACE AND HEARING THEIR STORIES AND HOW IT IMPACTS THEM, ASKING THEM ABOUT THEIR VALUES AND THEIR PRIORITIES. 
          AND, UM, THEY CAME TOGETHER AND, UH, COLLECTIVELY EXPRESSED THEIR INFORMED OPINIONS AND THE RESULT OF THIS WORK. 
          NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, IS KIND OF THE FOUNDATION OF THE 2035 PLAN. 
          SO YOU'VE SEEN THIS BEFORE, BUT I WANNA JUST REITERATE THAT THESE ARE THE COMMUNITY VALUE STATEMENTS THAT 
          [01:10:01]
WE DEVELOPED. 
          WE DRAFTED THESE WITH PHRASES THAT WE HEARD TIME AND AGAIN FROM THE COMMUNITY, AND THEN WE ASKED FOR THEIR FEEDBACK. 
          WE INCORPORATED IT. 
          AND IN THE LAST COMMUNITY WORKSHOP WE SHARED THESE AGAIN AND WE GOT GENERAL THUMBS UP. 
          WE DIDN'T HEAR ANY FOLLOWING FEED UP FEEDBACK. 
          REALLY, REALLY QUICK QUESTION. 
          YES, SIR. 
          IN THE PREVIOUS SLIDE, UM, I DIDN'T SAY SEE TWO IMPORTANT NAMES, UM, WHICH ARE BIG ENERGY USES USERS, SAMSUNG AND NXP, WHO'VE BEEN VERY INVOLVED. 
          ARE THEY REPRESENTED BY CCARE OR WHERE SOME OF THE LARGE INDUSTRIALS LIKE THE SEMICONDUCTORS ARE REPRESENTED BY CCARE? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          SO, UM, SO THE COMMUNITY HELPED US DEFINE THESE VALUE STATEMENTS, UM, AND THEN THESE OBJECTIVE STATEMENTS ON THE NEXT SLIDE AS WELL. 
          SO THE OBJECTIVE STATEMENTS PROVIDE MORE DIRECTION TO THE VALUES, AND THEY ALSO, UH, MODEL THE PRIORITY ORDER EXPRESSED BY THE COMMUNITY. 
          AND YOU'LL NOTICE THAT THERE'S NO SEPARATE OBJECTIVE STATEMENT FOR ENERGY EQUITY. 
          UM, AND THAT IS BECAUSE, UM, THERE IS AN INCORPORATION OF ENERGY EQUITY INTO EACH ONE OF THESE PLAN OBJECTIVES. 
          UM, AND THAT'S HIGHLIGHTED IN THE BLUE BOLD TEXT. 
          ALRIGHT, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          SO THEN WE SPENT TIME DOING A MODELING TRACK AND YOU KNOW THAT WELL, 'CAUSE YOU SPENT HOURS AND HOURS SITTING WITH US HERE IN OFFICE HOURS, UM, REVIEWING THE DATA AND WHATNOT. 
          SO, UM, SO MANY MODELS, SO MUCH DATA, SO MANY HOURS. 
          BUT THE WHOLE POINT OF IT WAS TO, UH, UNDERSTAND TRADE-OFFS AND OUR RESOURCE PLAN NEEDS. 
          AND I JUST WANNA STOP AND SAY THANK YOU FOR ALL THE TIME AND EFFORT THAT YOU PUT INTO IT. 
          I KNOW IT WAS A LOT, UM, BUT OUR GOAL WAS TO UNDERSTAND TRADE-OFFS AND WHAT WE NEED TO PUT INTO OUR RESOURCE PLAN. 
          AND SO LAST MEETING, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          WE PIVOTED. 
          WE SAID WE'RE NOT PICKING A PORTFOLIO. 
          JUST A REMINDER, I STILL GET PEOPLE ASKING ME, WHICH PORTFOLIO ARE YOU PICKING? SO WE'RE NOT PICKING A PORTFOLIO. 
          UM, THERE ARE JUST TOO MANY UNCERTAINTIES IN MODELING AND TOO MANY UNKNOWNS IN THE FUTURE THAT WE USE PORTFOLIOS AND MODELING TO GIVE US INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT NEEDS TO GO IN THE RESOURCE PLAN. 
          AND SO WE PIVOTED LAST, UM, LAST MEETING AND WE ASKED YOU TO RESPOND, UH, TO TWO QUESTIONS IN A SURVEY. 
          ONE WAS, WHAT KEY INSIGHTS DID YOU RECEIVE FROM THE MODELING AND WHAT CHARACTERISTICS DO YOU WANNA SEE IN THE PLAN? AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE ARE, UM, GONNA LOOK AT NOW IS THE RESULTS OF THE SURVEY. 
          UH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE, OF ALL OF YOUR RESPONSES TO THE KEY INSIGHTS QUESTION. 
          THERE WERE FOUR MAIN THEMES AND WE'RE GONNA GO INTO EACH ONE OF THESE, UM, INDIVIDUALLY. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          SO FIRST, Y'ALL SAID INVESTMENT IS NEEDED. 
          YOU SAID NEARLY ALL THE PORTFOLIOS SHOW REAL PROBLEMS BEGIN IN A FEW YEARS, UM, POINTING TO THE NEED TO MAKE SOME INVESTMENTS. 
          AND THAT AFFORDABILITY IS VERY IMPORTANT GIVEN THE NATURE OF THE STATEWIDE GRID. 
          SOME OF YOU KIND OF LAMENTED, I ASSUME IT'S GOING TO BE EXPENSIVE AND NEARLY ALL PORTFOLIOS SHOW COST BEING ABOVE THE 2% AFFORDABILITY GOAL. 
          AND THE WAY THAT I, UM, READ SOME OF THESE IS THAT, UM, ACTION IS NEEDED. 
          IT WILL COST MONEY. 
          IT'LL ALSO COST MONEY IF WE DON'T DO THINGS. 
          SO, UM, I PUT THEM ALL UNDER THE CATEGORY OF INVESTMENT AS NEEDED. 
          UM, THERE WAS ALSO A BROAD CONSENSUS OR LOTS OF FEEDBACK ABOUT INCREASING TRANSMISSION CAPACITY. 
          THE ADDITIONAL 250 OF MEGAWATTS THAT WE MODELED IN THE REFINED PORTFOLIOS REDUCES THE RELIABILITY RISKS. 
          WE CAN'T CONTROL EVERYTHING SUCH AS EXTREME WEATHER, BUT WE CAN MAKE OUR RISKS LOWER WITH IMPORTANT INVESTMENTS IN LOCAL GENERATION, BUT ESPECIALLY IN TRANSMISSION, SOMEWHERE AROUND 250 MEGAWATTS IS THE AMOUNT NEEDED TO REDUCE RISK ON THE SYSTEM AND KEEP PRICE SEPARATION AWAY. 
          AND THEN LOCAL TRANSMISSION UPGRADES ARE KEY FOR IMPROVED RELIABILITY, AFFORDABILITY, AND SUSTAINABILITY FOR AUSTIN. 
          SO WHY DON'T WE PAUSE FOR A MINUTE. 
          MM-HMM. 
           ASK FOR QUESTIONS ONLINE OR ANYONE IN HERE. 
          WE HAVE A NEW MEMBER. 
          WE HAVE SOME OTHER MEMBERS THAT REALLY WEREN'T PARTICIPATING IN AS MUCH IN THESE DISCUSSIONS. 
          SO ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS OR DISCUSSION YOU WANT HAVE ON THIS SO FAR? OKAY, THANKS. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          THE NEXT TWO CATEGORIES, UM, WERE DO NOT PREMATURELY RETIRE EXISTING GENERATION. 
          SO WE SHOULD NOT PLAN TO RETIRE OUR EXISTING GAS UNITS AT THIS TIME. 
          KEEPING THE GAS UNITS AT SOME LEVEL OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS IS IMPORTANT, THOUGH IT'S POSSIBLE TO RUN THEM LESS. 
          AND THEN SOMEONE LOOKED AT THE PORTFOLIO SPECIFICALLY AND CONCLUDED IT SEEMS THAT KEEPING DECKER AND SANDHILL AVAILABLE THROUGH 2035 HAS A SIMILAR REDUCTION ON RELIABILITY RISK. 
          AND THEN THIS LAST CATEGORY IS A LITTLE BIT OF A CATCHALL, SO I DIDN'T GO INTO THREE MORE SLIDES. 
          UM, BUT COLLECTIVELY THESE, UH, TALK ABOUT PEAKERS BATTERIES AND CARBON FREE INSIGHTS. 
          SO, UM, IF WE NEED SOME PEAK CAPACITY THAT IS SELDOM USED, THEN WE SHOULD SEE IF THE BENEFITS OF THAT OUTWEIGH THE COSTS. 
          AND MAYBE THOSE CARBON EMISSIONS CAN BE OFFSET IN SOME WAY. 
          [01:15:01]
UH, SOMEONE ELSE SAID, I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF A NEW COMBINED CYCLE PLANTS, BUT I'M OKAY WITH AS MANY NATURAL GAS PEAKER UNITS AS NEEDED AS PART OF A BALANCED GENERATION MIX. 
          UH, SOMEONE RELATED TO BATTERIES SAID, I THINK WE'RE UNDERESTIMATING THE LOCAL BATTERY STORAGE CAPABILITY. 
          WE NEED TO COORDINATE WITH TRANSMISSION PLANNING AS A SOLUTION TO CONGESTION AND LOAD ZONE PRICING. 
          UM, I THINK BATTERIES ARE IMPORTANT, SHOULD BE IN THE MIX, BUT BATTERY HEAVY ISN'T GOING TO BE VIABLE FINANCIALLY. 
          AND THEN IT LOOKS LIKE A CARBON FREE FUTURE WILL BE POSSIBLE ONCE SOME KEY TECHNOLOGIES, MOST NOTABLY LONG DURATION STORAGE. 
          MATURE A BIT MORE. 
          DID YOU WANNA DO THE SAME ON THIS SLIDE? LET'S PAUSE FOR A MINUTE. 
          ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS IS OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          SO, UM, THE NEXT SLIDE SHOWS THE FOUR CATEGORIES, HOW WE SUMMARIZED YOURS. 
          AND THEN WE HAD SHARED OUR KEY INSIGHTS WITH YOU AS WE DEVELOPED THE, UH, PORTFOLIOS, UM, THE REFINED PORTFOLIOS, AND THEY ALIGNED UP PRETTY WELL. 
          UM, SO IN TERMS OF THE INVESTMENT AS NEEDED, WE OBSERVED THAT WE HAVE IMMEDIATE CHALLENGES WE NEED TO SOLVE. 
          AND THE MODEL RESULTS ARE VERY SENSITIVE TO HIGH LOAD GROWTH SCENARIOS. 
          UM, TRANSMISSION CAPACITY AND EXISTING GENERATION. 
          WE TOOK THE SAME TAKEAWAYS FROM THE MODELING AS YOU DID WHEN IT COMES TO PEAKER'S BATTERIES AND CARBON FREE. 
          WE LOOKED AT TWO OF THE PORTFOLIOS THAT, UM, TRIED TO, UH, WORK THROUGH RELIABILITY AND LIQUIDITY RISK. 
          AND WE NOTED THAT THE HIGH LEVELS OF NEW ENERGY EFFICIENCY, DEMAND RESPONSE, LOCAL SOLAR AND STORAGE PLUS EXISTING GENERATION MANAGE RELIABILITY AND LIQUIDITY RISK, BUT AT A HIGHER COST AND PACE OF ADOPTION EXCEEDS THE ESTIMATED FEASIBILITY. 
          SO THIS WAS A, A TAKEAWAY THAT, CAN I ASK, CAN I ASK A QUESTION? SURE. 
          I'LL LET YOU FINISH. 
          I WAS JUST GONNA SAY THIS IS A TAKEAWAY THAT, THAT POINTED TOWARDS SOME OF THE PORTFOLIOS, UM, THAT THE EUC ASKED US FOR, UM, WHERE THE, THE AMOUNT OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY, DEMAND RESPONSE, UH, SOLAR AND STORAGE WERE HIGHER THAN WHAT DNV SAID WAS THE MAX POTENTIAL. 
          THAT THAT IS BASICALLY WHAT I WAS GONNA ASK YOU. 
          SO BASICALLY WHAT'S THAT'S SAYING IS THE PORTFOLIOS THAT WE ASKED YOU TO MODEL, LIKE 15, 16, AND 17. 
          THAT'S RIGHT. 
          YOU'RE THE FEELING OF AUSTIN ENERGY INTERNALLY WAS THOSE NUMBERS WHILE THEY SOLVE THE PROBLEM, YOU'RE NOT CONVINCED YOU'RE THE THE CONSULTANT YOU HIRED IS, IS NOT CONVINCED THAT WE CAN REACH THOSE NUMBERS. 
          THEREFORE IT CALLS INTO QUESTION THAT THOSE PORTFOLIOS IS THAT THAT'S RIGHT. 
          THAT'S RIGHT. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          TO GET TO THE LEVELS OF, OF RELIABILITY THAT WE NEED, WHICH DOESN'T MEAN ENTIRELY IS GONE. 
          RIGHT. 
          BUT JUST TO BRING IT MORE INTO IMBALANCE, WE WERE NOTING A NUMBER OF OUR PORTFOLIOS. 
          WE, AS WE WERE KIND OF REFINING THEM, UM, WE WERE TRYING TO SEE CAN WE SOLVE SOME OF THE RELIABILITY RISKS. 
          IT'S WHY WE ADDED THE TRANSMISSION CAPACITY. 
          IT'S WHY WE TRIED TO KEEP THE, UH, EXISTING GENERATION IN THERE. 
          'CAUSE YOU WOULD SEE THE RELIABILITY RISK NUMBERS SHOOT UP. 
          AND SO THEN WE'RE LIKE, WELL, WHAT DOES IT TAKE? WHAT EL WHAT OTHER THINGS CAN YOU PUT NOW I'M GONNA JUMP AHEAD FOR A MOMENT, BUT TOOLS IN THE TOOLBOX TO TRY TO GET THE RELIABILITY RISK DOWN TO WHAT IS LESS SCARY LEVELS THAN CURRENT DAY. 
          AND SO, UM, WE SAW THOSE LIST RISKS GO DOWN, BUT IT WAS AT LEVELS THAT WE THINK ARE, ARE BEYOND WHAT THE CONSULTANTS HAVE SUGGESTED WE THINK ARE FEASIBLE. 
          UM, AND SO, UH, THERE, YOU KNOW, WE SHOULD QUESTION WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO BET ON THAT TYPE OF ADOPTION. 
          UM, AND, AND RELY ON JUST THOSE TOOLS IN OUR TOOLBOX. 
          AND MY, MY READING OF THE, WE ASKED A BUNCH OF QUESTIONS. 
          THE CONSULTANT, THEY CAME BACK WITH ANSWERS. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          AND THE, THE WAY I'M PARAPHRASING IT IS THE CONSULTANT DIDN'T SAY THE LEVELS THAT YOU MODELED AREN'T POSSIBLE. 
          WHAT THEY SAID IS, UNDER CURRENT CIRCUMSTANCES, IT'S NOT POSSIBLE. 
          OR YOU WOULD HAVE TO INVEST QUITE A BIT MORE MONEY TO GET THERE. 
          THAT'S, WELL, I THOUGHT THERE WERE TWO NUMBERS. 
          THERE WAS THE ECONOMIC OPTIMAL AND THEN THE TECH TECHNICALLY FEASIBLE OR TECHNICALLY POSSIBLE. 
          AND I THOUGHT THE ECONOMICALLY OPTIMAL WAS ACHIEVABLE. 
          MAYBE YOU COULD GIVE US SOME MORE SPECIFICITY ON THOSE TWO. 
          I MEAN, IT'S OBVIOUS THAT THE TECHNICALLY ACHIEVABLE IS AT, YOU KNOW, AT BEST A STRETCH GOAL. 
          I MEAN, IT'S MEANS IT'S, YOU GOTTA SPEND A LOT OF MONEY ON THAT AND IT'S BEYOND THE ECONOMICS. 
          BUT THAT SET OF NUMBERS FROM DNV ON THE ECONOMICALLY OPTIMAL, CAN YOU DESCRIBE MORE FULLY WHAT THOSE NUMBERS WERE AND HOW ACHIEVABLE? BECAUSE WHEN I HEAR THE DISCUSSION ABOUT ACHIEVABILITY VERSUS MAYBE NOT ACHIEVABLE YES. 
          HOW DOES THAT PLAY INTO THE ECONOMICALLY OPTIMAL? DAVID, CAN YOU JUMP AHEAD TO SLIDE 44? IT'S IN THE APPENDIX. 
          I PROMISE I DON'T HAVE THAT MANY SLIDES. 
          . 
          UM, AND SO 
          [01:20:01]
WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE FOR EVERYBODY IS THAT, UM, THIS IS, UH, THE NUMBER, UH, THE AMOUNT OF MEGAWATTS OF DIFFERENT RESOURCES THAT WE MODELED IN SOME OF THE PORTFOLIOS. 
          UM, UH, THE, THE FOUR COLORED BARS ARE PORTFOLIOS 14, 15, 16, AND 17. 
          15, 16 AND 17, UM, WERE ONES THAT WERE, UH, DEFINED BY THE ELECTRIC UTILITY COMMISSION. 
          UM, AND THEY, UH, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE MAX ECONOMIC MARKET POTENTIAL FROM THE DNV STUDY IS SHOWN BY THE BLACK DOTTED LINE. 
          AND SO WHAT WE DID IN OUR PORTFOLIOS WHERE WE WAS, WE MAXED OUT, WE SAID THEY, THAT THAT'S AS MUCH AS, UM, THE, YOU KNOW, WE HIRED A THIRD PARTY TO TELL US WHAT CAN WE DO? WHAT DO WE THINK WE CAN, WE CAN KIND OF COUNT ON AS WE MOVE FORWARD OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS? UM, OUR ULTIMATE IDEA AND OBJECTIVE WAS TO FIGURE OUT IS THAT ENOUGH OR DO WE NEED MORE? DO WE NEED TO BUILD MORE? AND SO WE'LL TALK MORE ABOUT THAT AS WE LOOK AT OUR PROPOSAL. 
          BUT WHAT WE'RE SAYING HERE IS THAT, UM, WE PUT IN THE MAX AMOUNT AND, UM, AND THEN THE, UH, PORTFOLIOS 15, 16 AND AND 17 FROM THE EUC HAD, UM, HIGHER, HIGHER QUANTITIES. 
          AND THEN, UH, CYRUS, YOU'RE RIGHT, YOU ASKED DNV SPECIFICALLY ABOUT WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THESE NUMBERS, RIGHT? UM, AND I THINK YOU MIGHT HAVE, UM, YOU SAID YOU WERE LOOKING AT A PORTFOLIO THAT HAD 540 MEGAWATTS OF EEE, UH, 180, SORRY, 300 MEGAWATTS OF DR AND 700 SOLAR. 
          SO YOU WERE LOOKING AT PORTFOLIO 17 WHEN YOU ASKED THAT QUESTION. 
          AND THEIR RESPONSE WAS, IN GENERAL MARKET POTENTIAL IS SEEN AS AN ESTIMATE OF WHAT COULD BE ACHIEVED. 
          AND I THINK YOU HAVE THESE, BY THE WAY, NOT NECESSARILY WITH YOU TODAY, BUT AMY SENT THEM OUT. 
          UM, MARKET POTENTIAL IS SEEN AS AN ESTIMATE OF WHAT COULD BE ACHIEVED UNDER IDEAL CONDITIONS, SUBJECT TO OUR ASSUMPTIONS AROUND INCENTIVES AND PROGRAM COSTS, WHILE CONFORMING TO INDUSTRY BEST PRACTICES IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE HIGHER LEVELS OF POTENTIAL, ADDITIONAL FUNDS AND RESOURCES WOULD NEED TO BE COMMITTED, AS WELL AS SUBSTANTIAL EFFORT EXPENDED TO BREAK DOWN BARRIERS TO ADOPTION AND PARTICIPATION SPECIFICALLY FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY. 
          INCREASING TO THE YELLOW AMOUNT, UH, WOULD BE CHALLENGING. 
          UNDER THE TIME HORIZON REQUIRED INCREASED PROGRAM SPENDING, PROGRAM STAFF AND IMPLEMENTATION STAFF, IT WOULD ALSO HAVE TO ASSUME THE AVAILABILITY OF THE EQUIPMENT AND WORKFORCE TO FACILITATE INSTALLATIONS, WHICH IS A BARRIER INDUSTRY-WIDE FOR LOCAL SOLAR, THE INCREASE THAT YOU HAVE, UM, WHICH IS ON THE FAR, UH, RIGHT SIDE, WOULD BE EXTREMELY CHALLENGING. 
          UM, HERE THE BIGGEST BARRIER IS COST OF THE SYSTEMS AND WOULD REQUIRE SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENT AND INCENTIVES IN ORDER TO MAKE THE DECISION TO PURCHASE EQUIPMENT COST EFFECTIVE FOR CONSUMERS. 
          IN ADDITION, SUPPLY CHAIN CONCERNS AND INTERCONNECTION BARRIERS WOULD LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF SOLAR THAT COULD BE REALISTICALLY INSTALLED. 
          AND THEN FOR DEMAND RESPONSE, WHICH WASN'T MUCH HIGHER, BUT THE RESPONSE WAS, IT WOULD BE MOST CHALLENGING IN TERMS OF PARTICIPATION. 
          THE PARTICIPATION RATES THAT WERE USED IN THE ANALYSIS ARE AT THE UPPER END OF WHAT IS CURRENTLY CONSIDERED ACHIEVABLE WITHIN THE INDUSTRY. 
          SIGNIFICANT INCREASES IN INCENTIVES THAT COULD RENDER THE PROGRAMS NOT COST EFFECTIVE MAY BE REQUIRED TO PUSH PAST THOSE UPPER LIMITS. 
          SO TO QUOTE DUMB AND DUMBER, THERE'S STILL A CHANCE . 
          I I THINK OUR INSIGHT IS THAT WE JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT YOU COULD GET THERE IF YOU EXCEED THE ESTIMATED FEASIBILITY. 
          AND THEN I THINK THERE'S A QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANNA RELY ON MAKING IT, MAKING A BET THAT THAT WOULD HAPPEN AND THE COST WOULD BE HIGHER AND THE COST WOULD CERTAINLY BE HIGHER. 
          OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          THANKS. 
          SO I, I WILL SAY I HAVE SOME FRUSTRATION THAT WE'VE BEEN HEARING ABOUT THIS STUDY FOR A YEAR NOW. 
          AND, UM, I KNOW THE RESULTS HAVEN'T BEEN OUT THAT LONG, BUT THEY HAVE BEEN OUT FOR MONTHS AND YET WE HAVEN'T ACTUALLY SEEN THE STUDY. 
          I HAD PREVIOUSLY ASKED A COUPLE DIFFERENT TIMES WHETHER OR NOT THE STANDARD OFFER WAS INCLUDED AND HAD BEEN TOLD NO. 
          WE THEN ASK AGAIN, JUST TO BE CRYSTAL CLEAR AND WE GOT THE ANSWER THAT YES, IT WAS, HAD I KNOWN THAT I WOULD'VE HAD A WHOLE NOTHER SERIES OF QUESTIONS LIKE WHAT PRICE WAS ASSUMED. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, OTHER THINGS ABOUT THE PROGRAM, WE JUST, WE KNOW VERY LITTLE ABOUT THE ASSUMPTIONS BEHIND THESE NUMBERS, AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT THEY'RE WRONG, BUT IT REALLY WOULD'VE BEEN NICE TO HAVE THE ACTUAL REPORT FOR US TO LOOK AT INSTEAD OF JUST THESE BLACK LINES. 
          SO I APPRECIATE YOUR FRUSTRATION, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO RESPOND, UM, BECAUSE WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THESE ASSUMPTIONS UPFRONT, THERE WAS TIME DURING OFFICE HOURS, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT Y'ALL ASKED SEVERAL QUESTIONS ABOUT THEM WHEN YOU ASKED FOR, UH, YOU KNOW, TIME TO DELVE 
          [01:25:01]
DEEPER INTO IT. 
          YOU GAVE US A VERY LENGTHY LIST OF QUESTIONS THAT WE GOT RESPONSES TO AND POSTED AND SHARED WITH EVERYBODY. 
          THE REASON THAT THE REPORT'S NOT AVAILABLE IS SIMPLY BECAUSE THE SCOPE OF WORK IS NOT COMPLETE YET. 
          SO THIS WAS JUST A PORTION OF THE WORK THAT DNV ENERGY INSIGHTS HAS BEEN HIRED TO DO, WHICH WOULD HELP US FEED, UH, REASONABLE NUMBERS INTO OUR MODELING. 
          BUT THERE'S ADDITIONAL WORK THAT THEY'RE DOING RELATED TO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IN TERMS OF TRANSITIONING FROM MEGAWATT REDUCTION TO GREENHOUSE GAS AVOIDANCE. 
          AND THAT WORK IS STILL UNDERWAY, SO NOT YET COMPLETE. 
          SO I DON'T HAVE IT TO GIVE TO YOU. 
          I I STILL, I I GUESS I I WISH THAT YOU WOULD GIVE US WHAT YOU HAVE, YOU KNOW, EVEN IF IT'S NOT COMPLETED, YOU KNOW, THIS, YOU'RE SAYING THAT, THAT OUR, UH, PORTFOLIOS ARE JUST NULL AND VOID BECAUSE OF THE STUDY THAT WE DON'T GET TO SEE. 
          SO I, I GET IT. 
          WE'RE NOT GONNA SEE IT. 
          BUT DAVID, IF YOU GO BACK TO SLIDE 16, SORRY, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING ELSE, CYRUS? WELL, I WOULD SAY NOT NULL AND VOID, BUT I WOULD SAY, UM, THERE'S A NUMBER THAT DNV HAS PROVIDED AND IF CITY COUNCIL WANTED TO GO PURSUE NUMBERS BEYOND THAT, IT WOULD BE WITH THE EXPECTATION THAT YOU WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO, IT WOULD COST MORE, RIGHT? WELL, THAT'S WHAT I DON'T KNOW. 
          YEAH. 
          LIKE DID THEY ASSUME THAT THEY WERE GONNA PAY SEVEN POINT SOMETHING CENTS FOR THE STANDARD OFFER? OR DID THEY ASSUME THE 11 POINT WHATEVER THAT GOT APPROVED? I, YOU KNOW, UM, I WOULD AGREE WITH, UM, THE POINT THIS IS, THIS IS JUST AN INSIGHT AND AN OBSERVATION THAT THE NUMBERS THAT GOT TO, UH, THE RELIABILITY EXCEEDED THE ESTIMATED FEASIBILITY. 
          UM, THE LAST BULLET ON THE SLIDE IS TALKING ABOUT, UH, REACHING MANAGING RELIABILITY AND LIQUIDITY RISK WITH, UH, PORTFOLIO 14, THAT OBJECTIVE OF THAT PORTFOLIO WAS TO SAY WHAT'S THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF, UM, ADDITIONAL, UH, STORAGE AND NATURAL GAS PEAKERS YOU COULD USE TO, UM, FILL THE REST OF THE GAP. 
          AND, AND SO, UH, PORTFOLIO 14, ALSO MANAGED RELIABILITY AND LIQUIDITY RISK. 
          UM, WHILE MAINTAINING LOW OVERALL USE OF THE PEAKERS, WE WERE TRYING TO TEST AND SEE, UM, COULD WE REALLY KEEP THEIR CAPACITY FACTOR LOW? AND THEY DID RUN LESS THAN 12% OF THE TIME. 
          UM, CAN I ASK A QUICK QUESTION? UH, YEAH, YEAH. 
          THE PREVIOUS SLIDE, THAT WAS FOR SCENARIOS 14, 15, 16, 17, OR I MIGHT HAVE THE NUMBERS WRONG, IS THAT ON A DIFFERENT SLIDE DECK? 'CAUSE I DON'T THINK IT'S ON THE BACKUP THAT WE HAD. 
          I JUST WAS CURIOUS IF I HAVE THE RIGHT, UH, SLIDE DECK, I GUESS. 
          UM, IT'S IN THE APPENDIX OF THE, OH, IN THE APPENDIX. 
          OKAY. 
          YEP. 
          AH, THAT ONE GETS ME EVERY TIME. 
          I'M SORRY, , THE APPENDIX IS LONG. 
          THE APPENDIX, THE APPENDIX IS LONG ON THIS ONE. 
          YES. 
          THE APPENDIX, UH, TO BE CLEAR, BECAUSE I DON'T WANNA FORGET TO TELL YOU THIS LATER, THE APPENDIX INCLUDES, UM, SOME INFORMATION THAT'S SPECIFIC TO WHAT WE'RE PRESENTING TODAY, BUT IT ALSO PRESENTS THE UPDATED, UH, THE FULL SET OF RESULTS FOR 14, 15, 16, AND 17 THAT WE GAVE YOU LAST TIME, BUT WEREN'T ABLE TO FULLY PRESENT 'CAUSE OF A GLITCH IN THE MODELING. 
          AND SO WE GAVE IT TO ALL THE COMMISSIONERS. 
          MM-HMM. 
          WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT WAS PUBLIC. 
          SO WE, WE APPENDED IT TO THE BACK OF THIS ONE AS WELL. 
          SO FOR ALL THE SOUNDS GOOD. 
          THANK YOU PUBLIC. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, SO, UM, I WANNA MOVE AGAIN FROM THE WEEDS OF MODELING INTO HOW WE GET TO THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PLAN AND DIALOGUE ABOUT WHAT YOU WANNA SEE IN THE PLAN. 
          THESE AGAIN, ARE JUST OBSERVATIONS. 
          SO NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          SO AGAIN, THE BASIS OF THE PLAN IS ARE THE VALUES AND THE OBJECTIVES THAT WERE FORMED WITH THE COMMUNITY. 
          AND THEN, UM, IT'S THE TOOLKIT, UH, THAT, LIKE WHAT ELSE ARE WE DOING WITH THAT? THE TOOLKIT IS WHAT I'M ABOUT TO PRESENT TO YOU. 
          THOSE ARE LIKE ACTIONS AND DETAILS THAT HELP, UH, PROVIDE THE FLEXIBILITY, UH, TO MANAGE THE TRADE-OFFS AND THE CHANGING CONDITIONS. 
          SO YOU COULD ASK YOUR QUESTION ABOUT LIKE, WHAT KIND OF TOOLS ARE WE PUTTING IN THE TOOLKIT? UM, AND WE, UH, USE THIS FRAMEWORK IN THE, WITH THE, UH, THOUGHT THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO SEE HOW WE'RE GONNA GET THE RIGHT TOOLS TO BALANCE TRADE OFFS AND, UM, AND THEN ALSO TO TRY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN REMAIN OUTCOME BASED. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          I'M DEFINITELY NOT GONNA READ YOU THIS SLIDE BECAUSE THIS IS EVEN JUST A SUMMARY OF IT. 
          IF YOU WANT TO GO IN THE APPENDIX AND SEE ALL OF THE FEEDBACK THAT Y'ALL PROVIDED IN RESPONSE TO THE SURVEY QUESTION ABOUT WHAT ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT CHARACTERISTICS TO REFLECT IN THE 2035 PLAN. 
          AND SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR RESPONSE. 
          UM, IN SUMMARY, YOU TALKED ABOUT SAYING YOU NEED FLEXIBLE MULTIFACETED PORTFOLIOS, AND YOU TALKED ABOUT THAT IN THE FORM OF ADAPTABILITY, RESOURCE INVESTMENTS AND BATTERY STORAGE. 
          THERE WAS A HIGHLIGHT ON DEMAND MANAGEMENT AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY. 
          YOU TALKED ABOUT CUSTOMER ENERGY SOLUTIONS AND FLEXIBLE TARGETS, UM, WITH REGARDS TO CARBON 
          [01:30:01]
REDUCTION AND RENEWABLES, YOU ASKED FOR CLEAN ENERGY COMMITMENT, UH, CARBON FREE BY 2035 AND EMISSIONS CONTROLS. 
          AND THEN, UH, YOU ALSO TALKED ABOUT RELIABILITY AND AFFORDABILITY, UM, IN THE FORM OF OPPORTUNITY COSTS, AFFORDABILITY GOALS, MITIGATING CONGESTION, AND HAVING RELIABILITY ASSURANCE. 
          AND THEN YOU, SOME OF YOUR COMMENTS SPOKE TO INFRASTRUCTURE AND POLICY LEADERSHIP IN THE FORM OF TRANSMISSION BUILDING AND ENERGY CODES AND EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES. 
          SO WE TOOK ALL, WE'RE TAKING ALL OF THIS INTO CONSIDERATION AS WE BUILD THE DRAFT PLAN, THOUGH TEXT IN BLACK IS JUST A SAMPLING OF THE QUOTES OR THE RESPONSES YOU GAVE TO US. 
          AGAIN, THIS, THE APPENDIX HAS THE FULL DETAILED LIST OF YOUR RESPONSES. 
          OKAY. 
          SO WE TAKE THIS AND WE TAKE ALL THE FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY AND EVERYWHERE WE'VE GONE SO FAR, AND WE START TO TALK ABOUT WHAT'S ACTUALLY IN THE PLAN. 
          NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. 
          THERE ARE FOUR MAJOR CATEGORIES. 
          AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, YOU'RE GIVING US THE PLAN TONIGHT OR YOU'RE GIVING US THE PLAN NEXT MEETING. 
          SO I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA GIVE YOU THE, THE OFFICIAL PROPOSED DRAFT PLAN WILL BE POSTED NEXT WEEK, UM, AND FOR A VOTE, A RECOMMENDATION BY Y'ALL ON DECEMBER 2ND. 
          WHAT I'M DOING TONIGHT IS I'M HIGHLIGHTING HOW FAR WE HAVE, LIKE THIS IS THE BASIS OF THE PLAN. 
          OKAY. 
          SO THAT I CAN GET YOUR FEEDBACK SO THAT YOU CAN SAY, I LIKE THIS, I DON'T LIKE THIS, I WANNA SEE THIS IN THERE. 
          MAKE SURE THIS IS IN THAT PIECE OF IT, ET CETERA. 
          IT'S KIND OF GETTING FROM THE MODELING TO THE PLAN. 
          I WANNA MAKE SURE WE DIDN'T RUSH YOU. 
          OKAY. 
          SO FOUR MAJOR CATEGORIES, UM, OF TOOLS WE PUT IN THE TOOLKIT. 
          AGAIN, THAT'S THE FRAMEWORK, UM, THAT ARE NECESSARY TO ADDRESS OUR, UM, CURRENT DAY CHALLENGES. 
          THE ORDER IS REALLY IMPORTANT AND I WANNA HIGHLIGHT THAT. 
          THE FIRST THING IS WE PRIORITIZE CUSTOMER ENERGY SOLUTIONS AND THEN WE LAYER IN LOCAL SOLUTIONS TO HELP MEET OUR LOCAL NEEDS FULLY. 
          WE ALSO WANNA KEEP OUR CLEAN ENERGY GOALS ACHIEVING DECARBONIZATION HAS TO BE THERE AS WELL. 
          AND THEN IN ORDER TO, UH, MAKE SURE WE CAN REACH OUR GOALS, WE NEED TO FOSTER A CULTURE OF INNOVATION SO WE'RE PO POSITIONED TO ADOPT EMERGING TECHNOLOGY, UM, WHEN IT BECOMES AVAILABLE SO WE CAN CONTINUE TO REACH OUR GOALS IN THE MOST RELIABLE AND COST EFFECTIVE WAY. 
          SO NEXT SLIDE PROVIDES DETAILS. 
          I FEEL LIKE I'M ASKING TOO MANY QUESTIONS. 
          I APOLOGIZE. 
          YOU'RE DOING GREAT. 
          IS IT OKAY OR? ABSOLUTELY SURE. 
          AND I, I KNOW OTHER COMMISSIONERS MIGHT HAVE QUESTIONS, SO, UM, QUESTION NUMBER ONE, MAINTAIN BLACK START UTILITY STATUS. 
          CAN YOU, I KNOW YOU'VE TOLD US THIS BEFORE, BUT CAN YOU TELL US RIGHT NOW, WHICH, WHICH UNITS PRESENTLY CAN PROVIDE BLACK START? YES. 
          ARE BLACKSTAR CAPABLE AS DEFINED BY ERCOT? YES. 
          OUR DECKER, UH, PEAKERS HAVE BLACKSTAR CAPABILITY. 
          TWO OF THEM ARE UNDER CONTRACT WITH ERCOT. 
          ONE IS A PRIMARY AND ONE IS A BACKUP SO THAT WE HAVE A UNIT AVAILABLE SHOULD THE WORST CASE SCENARIO HAPPEN. 
          OKAY. 
          AND CAN THE SANDHILL PEAKERS ALSO BE BLACKLY? CURRENTLY THEY ARE NOT. 
          THEY ARE NEXT START UNITS, YOU START A BLACK START UNIT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN YOU USE IT TO ENERGIZE A NEXT START UNIT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND I KNOW THERE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSIONS WITHIN ERCOT ABOUT SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE THAT BATTERIES COULD ALSO, INVERTER BASED RESOURCES COULD ALSO PROVIDE, UH, BLACKSTAR. 
          AM I CORRECT THAT THAT CURRENTLY IS NOT ALLOWED IN ERCOT, BUT THERE ARE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT IT PER PERHAPS IN THE FUTURE? THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING, YES. 
          IT IS NOT CURRENTLY ALLOWED IN ERCOT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN I JUST WANTED TO THANK YOU GUYS FOR THE WORK ON THE GEOTHERMAL. 
          THAT WAS EXCITING TO SEE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THE GEOTHERMAL. 
          OKAY. 
          I I HAD A FOLLOW UP QUESTION. 
          GO AHEAD. 
          IS THAT OKAY? GO AHEAD. 
          I'LL, UM, JUST ON THE SANDHILL PEAKERS, IS THERE LIKE A RETROFIT OR SOMETHING THAT COULD BE DONE TO MAKE IT SO THOSE COULD BE USED FOR BLACKSTAR? YES. 
          AND IF SO, CAN YOU DESCRIBE THAT OR TELL US? WELL, THERE IS SOME INVESTMENT THAT COULD BE DONE TO MAKE THEM BLACKSTAR CAPABLE. 
          YES. 
          AND, UM, THE SPECIFICS I'D HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU ON, UM, ACTUALLY I MIGHT HAVE IT WITH ME. 
          HOLD ON A SECOND. 
          OH, IT JUST SAYS REQUIRE UPGRADES AND MODIFICATIONS, SO. 
          OKAY. 
          THANKS. 
          WELL, I THINK THAT'S A A, A HOT TOPIC THAT KEEPS COMING UP. 
          SO I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW MORE ABOUT LIKE, APPROXIMATE COSTS, YOU KNOW, HOW LONG THAT WOULD TAKE, YOU KNOW, JUST TO UNDERSTAND THAT IF THAT'S POSSIBLE. 
          OKAY. 
          I DON'T THINK WE HAVE, UM, GONE TO THAT LEVEL OF ANALYSIS YET. 
          UM, GIVEN THE POINT OF THIS IS REALLY JUST, AND WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS, UM, THE MAINTAINED BLACKSTAR UTILITY STATUS. 
          THIS IS REALLY JUST AT THE POLICY LEVEL TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE, UM, UNITS THAT ARE ABLE TO SUPPORT, UM, THE GRID. 
          IF THE WORST CASE SCENARIO HAPPENS AND WE HAVE A BLACKOUT EMERGENCY IN TEXAS, UM, WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT UH, IF WE DON'T HAVE BLACK START CAPABLE UNITS, UM, THEN WE HAVE TO WAIT FOR POWER TO BE BROUGHT TO US. 
          UM, 
          [01:35:01]
AND SO WE REALLY WANNA BE PART OF THE SOLUTION, ESPECIALLY AS THE CAPITAL CITY. 
          SO YOUR QUESTIONS ARE VERY VALID, UM, AND, AND IMPORTANT. 
          WE WANNA MAKE SURE WE KEEP THAT, THAT AS A CAPABILITY AND WE WANNA MAKE MONEY. 
          NO, I MEAN, RIGHT. 
          IT'S A CONTRACT. 
          YOU GET PAID FOR IT. 
          RIGHT. 
          FROM WE, WE HAVE TO PAY FOR IT AS A LOAD AND WE CAN OFFSET THAT COST AS GENERAL. 
          OKAY. 
          SO, SO LISA, MAYBE YOU COULD DESCRIBE FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T UNDERSTAND NECESSARILY WHAT BLACK STARTUPS YOU, YOU TOUCHED ON A LITTLE BIT, BUT, UH, KIND OF BRING TO, TO BEAR THE SCENARIO OF IF WE HAD A BLACKOUT YEAH. 
          AND WE DIDN'T HAVE SUFFICIENT BLACKSTAR RESOURCES, THEN THE CAPITAL CITY IS BLACK, IT'S DEAD, IT'S DEAD UNTIL SOMEBODY ELSE BOOTS UP. 
          IT'S LIKE REBOOTING A COMPUTER AND THEN YOU CAN IMPORT. 
          AND THEN HOW MANY DAYS MIGHT THAT TAKE? BECAUSE YOU MAY HAVE PARTICIPATED IN THE ERCOT BLACKSTAR EXERCISES THAT THEY HAD. 
          I HAVE PARTICIPATED IN THE AIR CUT BLACKSTAR SIMULATIONS. 
          THEY ARE SCARY. 
          IT IS A VERY LONG AND TEDIOUS PROCESS. 
          AND IT WOULD BE WEEKS TO BRING, WEEKS TO, TO BRING THE, TO BRING THE GRID BACK. 
          IT WOULD CERTAINLY BRING BE YEAH. 
          WEEKS IF NOT LONGER. 
          I, I, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'VE NEVER HAD, FORTUNATELY NEVER HAD A BLACKOUT IN ERCOT. 
          UM, BUT, UH, WE DO, YOU KNOW, ERCOT AND ALL THE, UH, TRANSMISSION AND GENERATOR OWNERS ACROSS THE STATE WORK TOGETHER FOR, TO COORDINATE A PLAN. 
          UM, IT STARTS WITH HAVING UNITS THAT CAN START UP WITHOUT SUPPORT FROM THE ELECTRIC GRID. 
          'CAUSE THERE IS NO ELECTRIC GRID AT THIS POINT IN TIME. 
          UM, SO THEY START UP ON THEIR OWN AND THEN THEY START TO BUILD ISLANDS. 
          UM, AND THEY ESSENTIALLY START TO BUILD THE BACKBONE OF THE ERCOT GRID, THE TRANSMISSION GRID. 
          UM, AND UH, THEN ONCE YOU GET THE BACKBONE STABLE, YOU HAVE TO MAKE SURE ALL THE VARIABLES OF THE GRID STAY VERY IN LINE SO YOU DON'T HAVE COLLAPSE BECAUSE VOLTAGE GETS OUT OF WHACK OR FREQUENCY GETS OUTTA WHACK. 
          AND THEN, UM, YOU START YOUR BALANCING SUPPLY AND DEMAND LIKE GENERATION AND LOAD BIT BY BIT BY BIT. 
          AND IT'S A VERY, UH, CAREFULLY COORDINATED PROCESS. 
          UM, AND THEN ONCE YOU GET THE STABLE BACKBONE, THE TRANSMISSION BACKBONE, THEN YOU CAN START TO, UM, YOU KNOW, BRING POWER BACK TO ALL THE CUSTOMERS. 
          UM, AND, UH, YEAH, WE IMAGINE IT'S BEEN ESTIMATED THAT IT WOULD TAKE WEEKS. 
          IT'S A LOT WORSE IF YOU'RE SITTING THERE AND YOU DON'T HAVE BLACK START UNITS AND YOU'RE JUST WAITING FOR SOMEONE WHO NEARBY SOMEONE ELSE WHO HAS A BLACK START UNIT TO START UP AND TO TRY TO BUILD THOSE TOWARDS YOU. 
          SIX WEEKS, BOB BOB'S GUESS IS SIX WEEKS. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          SO IF WE HAD THAT CIRCUMSTANCE, THE QUESTIONS PROBABLY WOULD BE, WHY DIDN'T WE HAVE ENOUGH BLACKSTAR WITHIN INSIDE THE FENCE TO BOOT US UP? RIGHT? THIS IS, THIS IS ONE OF, YEAH. 
          THE, ONE OF THE REASONS THAT THIS IS ON THIS PLAN, UM, THE EXISTING PLAN HAS US SHUT DOWN ALL OF OUR EXISTING GENERATION. 
          AND SO MY TEAM SAYS, SO WHAT ARE WE GONNA DO WITHOUT BLACKSTAR UNITS? SO THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY THAT'S IN THERE. 
          PLEASE, I'M JUST CURIOUS, UM, IF IF IN THAT PROCESS, YOU KNOW, AUSTIN, YOU KNOW, IS A, IS A BIG-ISH CITY, LIKE HOW LONG WOULD IT TAKE EVEN WITH LIFESTAR UNITS JUST FOR, YOU KNOW, AUSTIN ENERGY? LIKE WOULD AUSTIN ENERGY SERVICE TERRITORY COME BACK ON IN A MATTER OF DAYS? OR I'M JUST CURIOUS LIKE HOW LONG IT WOULD TAKE JUST TO REBUILD THE LOCAL YEAH. 
          I, I DON'T KNOW THAT I HAVE THAT ANSWER BECAUSE THE WAY THAT IT'S DONE IS, AGAIN, YOU BUILD THE BACKBONE FIRST. 
          SO IT'S, IT'S NOT EVERYONE FOR THEMSELVES, RIGHT? THIS IS A MATTER OF BEING PART OF THE PROCESS WHERE PEOPLE ARE SAYING, WHAT ARE YOU DOING? AND OUR ANSWER IS EITHER, WELL, WE'RE WAITING FOR SOMEONE TO BRING US POWER, OR WE'RE ACTIVELY STARTING UP OUR BLACK, UH, BLACK STAR GENERATOR, WE'RE BUILDING THE, UH, SYNCHRONIZATION CORRIDORS AND ET CETERA, ET CETERA. 
          SO THANKS. 
          I, I, I GET THAT. 
          I, I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT THOUGH FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS ISN'T LIKE WE GET TO ISLAND AND, YOU KNOW, HAVE POWER. 
          LIKE, I PROBABLY WON'T HAVE POWER, EVEN IF Y'ALL ARE DOING YOUR BLACK, I MEAN, LET'S HOPE WE DON'T GET TO THIS POINT. 
          WELL, LET'S HOPE WE NEVER GET THERE. 
          IT WOULD BE A TERRIBLE SITUATION. 
          I DO THINK IT'S CONFUSING ENOUGH THAT SOME MIGHT THINK THAT THIS IS LIKE, OH, WE'RE, WE'RE GOOD. 
          IF WE HAVE THIS, WE WON'T BLACK OUT. 
          BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE I I THINK WE'RE BETTER. 
          WE STILL YEAH. 
          WE'RE BETTER. 
          WE'RE BETTER. 
          YEAH. 
          RIGHT. 
          AND, AND I ALSO, WE ALL THOSE, WE, WE DEFINITELY DON'T WANT THIS TO HAPPEN, BUT DURING WINTER STORM URI, THERE WAS, WE WERE FOUR MINUTES AND 30 SOMETHING SECONDS AWAY, RIGHT? WHICH WAS JUST HOLD YOUR BREATH. 
          UM, THANKFULLY, THANKFULLY THAT DID NOT HAPPEN. 
          UM, THE, OUR CUT GRID OPERATORS WERE ABLE TO SWEEP IN AND SAVE THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          SO WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME TALKING ABOUT BLACKSTAR. 
          I HAD PLANNED TO TALK ABOUT THAT LATER. 
          IF I START GOING INTO THAT, YOU REMIND ME. 
          OTHERWISE, LET ME START AT THE TOP, BECAUSE BEFORE YOU GET TO 
          [01:40:01]
GENERATORS, YOU HAVE TO START WITH PRIORITIZING CUSTOMER ENERGY SOLUTIONS. 
          IT'S CRITICAL AND IMPORTANT TO START THERE BECAUSE FOR ALL THE REASONS THAT YOU SPOKE ABOUT EARLIER WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE NUMBERS THAT YOU WANNA PUT INTO THE PORTFOLIOS, RIGHT? ENERGY EFFICIENCY, DEMAND RESPONSE, YOU KNOW, THE BEST WAY TO SERVE A CUSTOMER IS TO NOT HAVE TO PROVIDE THEM POWER IN THE FIRST PLACE, RIGHT? WE WANT TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO KEEP OUR BILLS LOW, TO KEEP OUR OUR CUSTOMERS COMFORTABLE. 
          UM, WE WANNA GIVE THEM THE SOLUTIONS THAT THEY WANT. 
          THAT INCLUDES THE ROOFTOP SOLAR AND THE CUSTOMER OWNED BATTERIES. 
          WE WANNA MAX OUT WHAT DNV SAYS WE CAN DO. 
          UM, AND THEN WE WANNA SAY, IS THAT ENOUGH? AND THE ANSWER IS NO. 
          YOU HAVE TO ALSO HAVE LOCAL SOLUTIONS. 
          SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THINGS LIKE, UM, AND THAT'S WHY IT SAYS MAXIMIZE DEMAND SIDE MANAGEMENT FIRST. 
          SO THAT ADDS IN TAKING INTO ACCOUNT ADDITION TRANSMISSION IMPORT CAPACITY. 
          WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME DIALOGUING ABOUT THAT BEFORE. 
          UM, WE KNOW IT'S NOT THE SILVER BULLET ANSWER. 
          UM, AND THEN WE ALSO NEED, UH, UTILITY SCALE BATTERIES. 
          WE NEED MORE EFFICIENT PEAKER UNITS THAT WOULD BE USED ONLY WHEN NEEDED. 
          AND THEN AGAIN, WE HAD SPENT A LOT OF TIME TALKING ABOUT BLACKSTAR UTILITY STATUS. 
          UM, ALL OF THESE THINGS COLLECTIVELY HELP US SOLVE OUR NEAR TERM TODAY RISK, BUT WE STILL WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE REAFFIRM OUR COMMITMENT TO CARBON FREE AND DECARBONIZATION. 
          SO THE CARBON FREE BY 2035 GOAL REMAINS, UH, FUNDAMENTAL TO OUR PLAN. 
          UM, AND AS DOES EXITING COAL AND REAFFIRMING REACH UNTIL WE CAN FIND THAT EXIT, UM, FROM THE FAYETTE POWER PLANT, IT, THIS INCLUDES REMOTE WIND AND SOLAR AND OTHER TECHNOLOGIES. 
          SOME OF THOSE WHICH STILL REMAIN IN A CULTURE OF INNOVATION BECAUSE THESE ARE ALL THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO DO TO STAY ON THE LEADING EDGE SO THAT WHEN THE EMERGING OR EVOLVING TECHNOLOGIES BECOME THE GAME CHANGERS THAT CAN ALLOW US TO GET RID OF OUR ANYTHING THAT, THAT PRODUCES FOSSIL FUEL AND HELP US REACH OUR CARBON FREE BY 2035, WE NEED TO BE READY AND POISED TO ADOPT THAT. 
          SO I KNOW THAT YOU MENTIONED THE GEOTHERMAL PROJECT, AND I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT AGAIN, THAT PILOT GEOTHERMAL GENERATION IS WHAT YOU JUST SAW IN THE NEWS RELEASE. 
          AND SO THE COGNITIVE DISSONANCE, THE PROBLEM I'M HAVING IS CARBON FREE BY 2035 AND THE NEED FOR MORE EFFICIENT PEAKER UNITS. 
          HOW CAN WE BUILD ADDITIONAL PEAKER UNITS AND STILL MEET A CARBON FREE BY 2035 GOAL? THAT'S WHERE I'M, I I DON'T, I SEE A DISCONNECT THERE. 
          YEAH, I MEAN, I, I HEAR YOU. 
          UM, RIGHT NOW, THE TECHNOLOGY THAT'S AVAILABLE TO US TO MEET OUR NEAR, NEAR TERM RISKS IS TO INCLUDE MORE EFFICIENT PEAKER UNITS. 
          THE IDEA HERE IS THEY WOULD BE USED ONLY WHEN NEEDED, AND THEY'RE MORE EFFICIENT THAN OUR EXISTING GENERATION. 
          SO ON A, ON A GOOD DAY, THEY'RE, THEY'RE, YOU'VE GOT CLEANER, UH, GENERATION COMING OUT OF IT THAT HELPS US GET CLOSER AND CLOSER TO OUR CARBON FREE GOAL. 
          UM, AND THEN, UH, EITHER THE TECHNOLOGY HAS EVOLVED, UM, SO THAT WE NO LONGER NEED THESE PEAKER UNITS IN 2035 AND WE DON'T USE 'EM ANYMORE. 
          UM, OR WE HAVE, UM, WE ESSENTIALLY ARE DOING SOMETHING WHERE WE'RE SAYING WE'VE DONE EVERYTHING WE CAN, AND THE ONLY WAY TO GET TO CARBON FREE OR, UM, IS TO CLEAN UP THE REST, DO THE BEST, AND CLEAN UP THE REST. 
          AND SO THAT WOULD BE THINGS LIKE CARBON CAPTURE OR MAYBE GREEN HYDROGEN ACTUALLY EXISTS IN 2035. 
          MAYBE IT DOES. 
          UM, AND THEN, UM, , SORRY, I HAD ANOTHER QUESTION. 
          I FORGOT IT. 
          OH, EXIT COAL AND REAFFIRM REACH, IS THAT REAFFIRM REACH ONLY ON FAYETTE, OR IS THAT ALSO THINKING ABOUT USING REACH ON THE GAS UNITS? SO YEAH, I DON'T WANNA GET, I DON'T WANNA GET BOGGED DOWN THE WEEDS, BUT I'M GONNA TAKE A MOMENT TO EXPLAIN WHAT I MEAN BY THAT. 
          SO THAT SPECIFICALLY IS RELATED TO THE REACH THAT WE APPLY TO, UH, SAY IT. 
          UM, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO HAVE GUARDRAILS AND USING THESE UNITS ONLY WHEN NEEDED. 
          SO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, UH, WHEN WE SAY MORE EFFICIENT PEAKER UNITS USED ONLY WHEN NEEDED, THE IDEA IS THAT THEY'RE PEAKER UNITS, RIGHT? THEY'RE NOT GETTING DISPATCHED ON A REGULAR BASIS. 
          FUNDAMENTALLY, THE ER CUT MARKET ISN'T GONNA DISPATCH THEM, RIGHT? WHEREAS THE COAL UNIT, IT'S MORE BASE LOAD, LIKE, YOU KNOW, SO THEY WANT, IT WANTS TO, TO RUN THAT MORE OFTEN, RIGHT? UM, THE BENEFIT OF REACH ON COAL IS THAT IT, IT DISPLACES THE COAL AND INSTEAD YOU USE, THERE'S, THERE'S CLEANER NATURAL GAS THAT'S COMING FROM THE ERCOT MARKET, RIGHT? IN THIS CASE, UM, IF YOU WERE TO APPLY REACH, IT'S, IT'S NOT QUITE THE SAME THING BECAUSE YOU'RE ALREADY ONLY USING THEM WHEN NEEDED. 
          SO WHAT WE THINK WE WOULD BE DOING HERE INSTEAD IS MONITORING THE CAPACITY FACTOR. 
          WE SAID WHEN WE MODELED IT, IT WAS ABOUT 12% OF THE TIME, UM, FOR OUR PEAKER UNITS. 
          AND THEN IF, IF OUR PEAKER UNITS STARTED TO RUN MORE THAN THAT, WE COULD PUT RUN HOUR LIMITATIONS ON THEM. 
          IT'S ESSENTIALLY, IT'S THE SAME THING. 
          I JUST, UH, WANNA SAY THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT LIMITING THE EMISSIONS, OR IT'S AN EMISSION LIMIT. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , YOU COULD DO THAT TOO. 
          YEAH, SURE. 
          [01:45:03]
I, I HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS AROUND THE REACH OR, UM, AND HOW THAT'S GONNA WORK, BUT I GUESS I'M GONNA START WITH THE CARBON CAPTURE PIECE OF THIS. 
          UM, IT WASN'T MODELED AT ALL BECAUSE Y'ALL PUT IT IN THE NOT TECHNOLOGICALLY READY CATEGORY. 
          UM, SO WE DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT HOW THAT CHANGES THE COST OF THAT PATH VERSUS, YOU KNOW, THE COST OF DOING MORE OF THE LOCAL SOLAR AND BATTERIES. 
          HAVE, HAVE Y'ALL DONE ANY RESEARCH? I MEAN, I ALSO HAVE FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS ABOUT, I I DON'T REALLY HEAR ANYTHING ABOUT CARBON CAPTURE BEING USED ON PEAKER PLANTS. 
          IT'S USUALLY ON MORE LIKE BASE LOAD, YOU KNOW, PLANTS THAT THAT'S EVEN A CONVERSATION ABOUT. 
          AND EVEN THEN OFTENTIMES A LOT OF, UM, COMPLICATIONS AND DIFFICULTIES. 
          UM, SO YEAH, I'M JUST, I'M JUST WONDERING LIKE WHAT RESEARCH HAVE YALE DONE? IS THIS JUST A KIND OF LIKE CARBON CAPTURE IS A THING THAT'S OUT THERE, OR DO WE HAVE, IS THERE SOMETHING BEHIND IT TO MAKE US THINK THAT IT COULD ACTUALLY BE IMPLEMENTED ON THE UNITS YOU'RE WANTING TO BUILD? SO, SO CARBON CAPTURE IS INTENDED, IN THIS CASE, AGAIN, IT'S IN THE CULTURE OF INNOVATION BECAUSE THERE'S, THERE'S A LOT TO BE STILL FIGURED OUT ABOUT THAT TECHNOLOGY. 
          UM, AND IT'S INTENDED TO BE A BROADER CATEGORY THAT WOULD CAPTURE BOTH CARBON CAPTURE AND SEQUESTRATION, DIRECT AIR CAPTURE, AND ANY OTHER TYPES OF TECHNOLOGIES THAT FORM IN THAT, IN THAT, YOU KNOW, SCHOOL OF THOUGHT, UM, OVER THE TIME BETWEEN NOW AND WHEN WE, UH, YOU NEED TO MEET OUR COMMITMENT OF, OF CARBON FREE BY 2035. 
          SO, UM, I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT COULD CHANGE BETWEEN NOW AND THEN. 
          AND SO NO, WE DIDN'T MODEL IT. 
          UM, NOW, BUT THE GOOD NEWS IS WE'RE NOT PICKING A PARTICULAR PORTFOLIO. 
          WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO DO IS TO, UM, BUILD A PORTFOLIO THAT MEETS, UM, ALL OF OUR NEEDS AND HAS THE FLEXIBILITY TO ADAPT TO A CHANGING ENVIRONMENT, UM, AND, AND THEN TO PUT RESTRICTIONS LIKE EMISSIONS CONTROLS AND WHATNOT, SO THAT WE CONTINUE TO BE A CLEANER, HAVE A CLEANER OUTCOME THAN WE HAVE TODAY. 
          UM, WHILE TECHNOLOGY CAN CATCH UP IN VARIOUS WAYS, I, I GUESS THAT, UM, THAT DOESN'T, THAT DOES NOT, THAT DOES NOT SOUND LIKE A PLAN. 
          AND I GUESS YOU'RE SAYING IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT A PLAN, BUT YOU HAVE UP ON ACHIEVED DECARBONIZATION RIGHT AT THE TOP, CARBON FREE BY 2035. 
          LIKE, WHAT IF YOU CAN'T DO CARBON CAPTURE OR DECIDE IT'S TOO EXPENSIVE? ARE YOU GONNA STOP RUNNING THOSE UNITS IN 2035 AFTER LESS THAN 10 YEARS AFTER YOU INVESTED IN THEM? WELL, LET ME TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT, BIT MORE ABOUT THE PEAKER UNITS AND THE OTHER OPPORTUNITIES OF WHAT WE'RE, WHAT THE OTHER THINGS WE'RE TRYING TO PUT INTO THE TOOLBOX, UM, AS WE START TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION. 
          BECAUSE IN REALITY, RIGHT, IT, IT IS, IT'S, IT'S ONE OF THE MOST AGGRESSIVE GOALS ACROSS THE ELITE UTILITIES IN THE UNITED STATES. 
          UM, AND SO WE, WE, SOME OF THEM ARE NOT EVEN WILLING TO GO THAT FAR. 
          A LOT OF 'EM HAVE CARBON NEUTRAL OR, UH, BY 2040 OR 2050. 
          AND SO, UM, AND SOME HAVE CARBON FREE, BUT BY FURTHER DATES OUT. 
          SO WE, THIS SHOWS OUR COMMITMENT, UM, TO FINDING A PATH, UM, AND WE'LL DO THE VERY BEST WE CAN WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF, OF WHAT WE CAN DO. 
          WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE STILL PROVIDE POWER RELIABLY, WE NEED TO DO IT AFFORDABLY, AND WE NEED TO DO IT, GET AS CLOSE AS WE CAN. 
          UM, AND WE'RE HOPING THAT TECHNOLOGY WILL ALLOW US TO GET THERE. 
          SO, UM, I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO TELL YOU, BUT, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S THE BEST I CAN DO WHEN I'M STANDING HERE TODAY IN 2025, LOOKING AT A GOAL THAT'S 10 YEARS OUT. 
          OKAY. 
          IS IT, UM, SO WE'RE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, POTENTIAL, UH, EFFICIENT PEAKER UTILIZATION, BE IT A MEGAWATT HOUR OR AN EMISSIONS LIMIT. 
          I MEAN, IS IT POSSIBLE TO ALSO, LIKE, LIKE A LOT OF THE ISSUE IS LIKE THE, THE CONGESTION AND TYPES OF THINGS. 
          IS IT, IS IT, IS IT POSSIBLE TO JUST USE THEM TO COLLAPSE THAT SUCH THAT WE, UM, SUCH THAT WE'RE, WE'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, EXPERIENCING HIGHER PRICES HERE VERSUS, VERSUS ELSEWHERE, LIKE AS A, AS A METHODOLOGY FOR USING THEM? YEAH, I THINK THAT'S ALSO SOMETHING THAT WE COULD CONSIDER IS MAKING SURE THAT THEY SERVE THE PURPOSE OF, UM, REDUCING THE CONGESTION PRICES THAT'S FUNDAMENTALLY WHEN THEY WOULD BE RUN ANYWAY. 
          SURE. 
          YEAH. 
          THAT'S ALL THAT ALL ALIGNS WITH WHEN WE'RE AT THE HIGHEST DEMAND, WHEN YOU NEED THE MOST, SO, YEAH. 
          YEP. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          CAN I PROMISE WE CAN COME BACK TO THIS SLIDE. 
          CAN I JUST SAY, I FEEL LIKE THERE'S 
          [01:50:01]
ONE BULLET POINT WHICH IS MISSING, WHICH BE, UM, I DON'T SEE THE WORDS LONG DURATION STORAGE. 
          I THINK A NUMBER OF US THINK THAT'S A TECHNOLOGY THAT AT SOME POINT WILL BE IMPORTANT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND I DON'T SEE IT THERE UNDER, I DUNNO WHERE IT WOULD BE ACHIEVED EITHER FOSTER CULTURE OF RENOVATION OR ACHIEVED DECARBONIZATION. 
          OKAY, THAT SEEMS LIKE A TECHNOLOGY WE SHOULD BE, I MEAN, YOU HAVE UTILITY SCALE BATTERIES, BUT I'M JUST SAYING SPECIFICALLY YEP. 
          LONG DURATION STORY. 
          AND TO BE CLEAR, JUST AS A PHILOSOPHY, I'M NOT LOOKING TO, UM, UH, EXCLUDE ANY SORT OF TECHNO. 
          I MEAN, I THINK IT'S NOTEWORTHY AND IT, IT DESERVES A NOTE. 
          UM, AND SO I'M, I'M GLAD YOU POINTED OUT I DIDN'T EVEN THINK ABOUT THAT. 
          UM, BUT IT, IT WOULDN'T BE A SITUATION WHERE IT'S LIKE, OH, IT WASN'T LISTED UNDER CULTURE OF INNOVATION, THEREFORE AUSTIN ENERGY'S NOT PAYING ATTENTION TO IT. 
          SO I, I APPRECIATE THAT IT'S NOTEWORTHY AND WE'LL, WE'LL ADD THAT IN. 
          UM, LET ME, LET ME KIND OF, UM, SAY THAT ONE THING THAT'S BECOME CLEAR THROUGHOUT ALL OF OUR CONVERSATIONS AND OUR MODELING IS THAT WE NEED TO HAVE FLEXIBILITY. 
          AND SO, AGAIN, ONCE YOU MAX OUT CUSTOMER ENERGY SOLUTIONS THAT YOU THINK YOU CAN REASONABLY COUNT ON, I HOPE WE HAVE MORE THAN THAT TOO. 
          I ABSOLUTELY DO. 
          UM, WE, WE KNOW THAT, BUT, BUT ONCE YOU MAX THAT OUT, UM, THEN YOU INCLUDE TRANSMISSION IMPORT CAPACITY. 
          THERE'S REALLY TWO TECHNOLOGIES THAT ARE READY TODAY TO FILL THE GAP, AND THAT'S BATTERY, UH, UTILITY SCALE BATTERIES AND THOSE PEAKER UNITS THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT. 
          AND I WANNA TALK ABOUT THOSE IN A LITTLE BIT OF DETAIL. 
          PEOPLE HAVE ASKED US TO TALK ABOUT THEM A LITTLE BIT MORE. 
          UM, SO NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          SO THIS IS A PICTURE OF KINDA WHAT THE TOOLS LOOK LIKE. 
          UM, WE'RE GONNA START WITH, UM, I PUT 'EM ON SIDE BY SIDE BECAUSE AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE TOOLKIT, UM, WE'RE PROPOSING THAT WE NEED BOTH OF THEM. 
          UM, SO ON THE LEFT YOU HAVE BATTERY STORAGE. 
          UH, THESE RESOURCES CAN STORE AND DISCHARGE ENERGY FOR A A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME, TYPICALLY TWO TO FOUR HOURS. 
          UM, THIS IMAGE IS 150 MEGAWATT, UH, POWER PLANT IN AUSTRALIA. 
          IT'S AN EXAMPLE OF A UTILITY SCALE SYSTEM. 
          WE DON'T HAVE THESE HERE LOCALLY YET, BUT THIS IS THE TYPE OF THING THAT WE COULD BUILD. 
          UM, WE DO HAVE SUBSTATION SIZE INSTALLATIONS. 
          SO EACH ONE OF THESE UNITS, UM, INDIVIDUALLY IS ABOUT THE SIZE OF A TRACTOR TRAILER. 
          YOU CAN PUT THOSE IN YOUR SUBSTATIONS. 
          I'VE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT FOR AUSTIN ENERGY, UM, AS PART OF THE SHINES PROJECT. 
          AND SO I HAVE A LOT OF EXPERIENCE WITH BATTERY STORAGE. 
          THEY'RE VERY FLEXIBLE TECHNOLOGY. 
          UM, THERE ARE SOME CHALLENGES ASSOCIATED WITH THEM. 
          UM, BUT I, I'M, I'M, I'M REALLY A FAN OF THEM IN GENERAL AND HOPE THAT WE CAN, UM, CAN, YOU KNOW, ALL AGREE THAT THAT'S THE RIGHT PATH FORWARD FOR OUR, UM, FOR OUR PORTFOLIO. 
          I MEAN, FOR OUR, OUR TOOLKIT, UM, THE, ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, YOU HAVE NATURAL GAS PEAKERS. 
          UM, THIS IS OUR DECKER SITE. 
          UM, AND SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT A PEAKER UNIT, THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT ARE CIRCLED IN THE, UH, IN THE WHITE CIRCLE. 
          UM, FOR COMPARISON OF SIZE. 
          SOMETIMES PEOPLE TALK ABOUT YOU'RE BUILDING A NATURAL GAS PLANT. 
          SO A NATURAL GAS PLANT IS LIKE THE DECKER STEAM UNITS THAT YOU SEE TO THE, UM, TO THE RIGHT. 
          UM, AND THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT WE RETIRED TO, UM, AT THE BEGINNING OF THE TIMELINE I TALKED ABOUT EARLIER. 
          UM, AND SO TO BE CLEAR, UM, WE AREN'T LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, A THOUSAND MEGAWATT NATURAL GAS, UH, PLANT, UH, LIKE A COMBINED CYCLE PLANT OR A STEAMER UNIT LIKE YOU SEE HERE. 
          UM, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PEAKER UNITS, THEY'RE SMALLER, THEY'RE MORE MODULAR. 
          UM, WE BASICALLY, WE HEARD ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS PRETTY LOUD AND CLEAR. 
          THERE WAS A LOT OF PUBLIC COMMENT AGAINST, UH, THE COMBINED CYCLE PLANT. 
          AND SO WE PIVOTED AWAY FROM WHAT WE BELIEVED AT THE TIME WAS THE MOST RELIABLE PATH FORWARD AND, UH, PIVOTED AWAY TO WHAT WE THINK IS, UM, CAN STILL FILL THE NEED. 
          REALLY, THESE UNITS WOULD JUST RUN TO FILL THE GAPS, UM, OF THE LONGER DURATION, UH, EVENTS. 
          OKAY. 
          SO, UM, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          THERE ARE TRADE OFFS ASSOCIATED WITH THESE. 
          AND, UH, NEXT SLIDE, DAVID. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          UM, FOR BATTERIES, UM, BATTERIES ARE HIGHLY DISPATCHABLE. 
          YOU CAN TURN THEM ON AND OFF VERY QUICKLY. 
          THEY CAN BE CLEANER DEPENDING ON HOW YOU CHARGE THEM. 
          THEY ARE DURATION LIMITED. 
          UM, YOU DO HAVE TO CONSIDER UPSTREAM THINGS LIKE MINERAL MINING PRACTICES AND WITH THE, UM, NEW THERE'S, THERE ARE REGULATORY RISKS, ESPECIALLY AS WE EXPECT UNDER THE NEW ADMINISTRATION. 
          WITH REGARDS TO TARIFFS AND INCENTIVES, I HOPE THEY DON'T IMPACT THEM TOO MUCH, BUT I'M NOT REALLY SURE WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN THERE. 
          UM, PEAKERS ARE ALSO HIGHLY DISPATCHABLE. 
          WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT BLACK START CAPABILITY. 
          THE NEWER UNITS WOULD PRODUCE LESS EMISSIONS THAN OUR CURRENT U UNITS. 
          UM, THERE ARE SOME CONS YOU HAVE TO THINK ABOUT, UPSTREAM, METHANE LEAKAGE, AND THEY DO, UH, CREATE EMISSIONS INCLUDING CARBON. 
          WHEN YOU LOOK AT HAVING BOTH BATTERIES AND PEAKERS IN YOUR PORTFOLIO, IN YOUR TOOLKIT, BATTERIES WOULD BE USED FIRST TO MINIMIZE THE EMISSIONS. 
          THEY WOULD SUPPORT THE SHORT DURATION NEEDS, AND YOU'D USE THOSE EVERY TIME YOU HAVE A SHORT DURATION NEED. 
          BUT THE PEAKERS STEP IN WHEN YOUR DURATION EXCEEDS WHAT THE BATTERIES ARE CAPABLE OF, UM, THE DIVERSITY OF THE TOOLS IMPROVES THE RESPONSE, AND 
          [01:55:01]
YOU'LL BE LESS VULNERABLE TO ANY OF THE DISADVANTAGES LISTED UP ABOVE. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          SO WE ALSO DID SOME MODELING TO COMPARE PEAKERS AND BATTERIES. 
          UM, AND IF YOU JUST LOOK AT THE PICTURE ON THE FAR LEFT AND THE FAR RIGHT, UM, EVERYTHING ELSE IN THESE PORTFOLIOS IS THE SAME. 
          UM, THIS HAS MAXIMUM ENERGY EFFICIENCY, DEMAND RESPONSE, LOCAL SOLAR AND CUSTOMER SIDE BATTERIES. 
          FROM THE DNV STUDY, THERE'S 1800 MEGAWATTS OF WIND AND SOLAR PPAS. 
          THAT'S THE, GETS TO YOUR 65%, UM, RENEWABLE ENERGY GOAL. 
          THIS INCLUDES 250 MEGAWATT IMPORT CAPACITY AND IT DOESN'T, UH, RETIRE THE EXISTING GENERATION. 
          SO EVERYTHING ELSE IS KEPT CONSTANT. 
          UM, WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE ORANGE BAR, THE RED BAR, UM, THE BATTERIES OPTION, UH, THE COST IS $400 MILLION HIGHER THAN THE PEAKER OPTION. 
          UM, SO NOT TOO MUCH. 
          UM, THE EMISSIONS FOR BATTERIES IS 0.9 MILLION, METRIC TONS LESS. 
          SO THERE IS A TRADE OFF THERE. 
          UM, BUT THE DIFFERENCE REALLY COMES IN THE RELIABILITY RISK. 
          AND SO WHEN YOU'RE JUST DOING BATTERIES, UM, THIS IS ESSENTIALLY THE EQUIVALENT OF, OF THE PORTFOLIOS THAT Y'ALL MODELED. 
          IT JUST REDUCES THE, UH, AMOUNT OF THE VOLUMES OF THE, THE TECHNOLOGIES DOWN TO, UM, THOSE, UH, MAXIMUM DNV LEVELS. 
          SO YOU STILL HAVE SOME RELIABILITY RISK HERE. 
          AND, UH, WHEN YOU END UP COMBINING THE BATTERIES WITH THE PEAKERS AND DO THE HYBRID SOLUTION, YOU START TO SEE MORE BALANCED TRADE-OFFS. 
          UM, YOU SEE MORE MIDDLE GROUND RESULTS. 
          UM, THE NEXT SLIDE TELLS A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT RELIABILITY RISK. 
          AND SO HERE IN 2027, WE INSTALLED THE FIRST AMOUNT OF EITHER BATTERIES OR PEAKERS. 
          IF YOU LOOK AT THE RED LINE, THAT'S THE PEAKERS UM, SOLUTION. 
          YOU CAN SEE THAT 200 MEGAWATTS OF PEAKERS BRINGS THAT NEAR TERM RELIABILITY RISK DOWN PRETTY FAR. 
          UM, THE BATTERIES, IT BRINGS IT DOWN A LITTLE BIT, BUT NOT AS MUCH. 
          YOU'LL SEE THE BATTERIES, THE RISK ACTUALLY GOES UP BECAUSE IT CAN'T FIGHT AGAINST THE LOAD GROWTH AND ONLY THE TRANSMISSION IMPORT CAPACITY BRINGS THAT RELIABILITY RISK DOWN IN THE BATTERIES ONLY PORTFOLIO. 
          THE HYBRID, HOWEVER, GIVES A LITTLE BIT ON RELIABILITY, UH, BUT AGAIN, PROVIDES MORE MIDDLE GROUND RESULTS, BUT STILL A SUBSTANTIAL DIFFERENCE. 
          UM, IN TERMS OF MITIGATING THE NEAR TERM RISK. 
          DO, IS THERE SOMEWHERE IN THE APPENDIX, UM, THIS SAME SLIDE, IF YOU DON'T MAKE ANY INVESTMENTS, I JUST CAN'T REMEMBER, LIKE IF WE DON'T DO ANYTHING BY 2027, WHAT IS THE RISK IN TERMS OF RELIABILITY RISK HOURS? THERE IS A NO NEW COMMITMENT, UM, PORTFOLIO THAT WAS MODELED. 
          I THINK IT WAS PORTFOLIO TWO. 
          SO IT'S SOMEWHERE IN THOSE EXCEL SPREADSHEETS AND I THINK IT'S IN THE EXCEL SPREADSHEETS. 
          OKAY. 
          IT, UM, WOULD NOT HAVE THE IMPORT CAPACITY, BUT IF YOU'RE JUST LOOKING AT, WHAT IS IT IN 27 OR 26, 25? YEAH, I'M JUST TRYING TO GET A SENSE OF, I THINK IT'S IN THE EXCEL FILES REALLY HELP. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          I'LL, I CAN LOOK AT IT LATER. 
          OKAY. 
          SO THE PATH FORWARD, UM, AFTER OUR DISCUSSION TONIGHT, UH, WE'RE GONNA HAVE A SIMILAR DISCUSSION WITH THE COUNCIL AT THE UUOC TOMORROW MORNING. 
          UH, WE'LL INCORPORATE THE FEEDBACK THAT YOU HAVE ON TOP OF WHAT WE'VE SHOWN YOU HERE AS THE PROPOSED PLAN AND POST THE PLAN, UH, NEXT WEEK, UM, FOR YOUR REVIEW THAT'S GETTING POSTED WITH THE COUNCIL AGENDA FOR DECEMBER 12TH. 
          UM, AND THEN YOU'LL RETURN ON DECEMBER 2ND AND VOTE ON THAT PLAN, UM, WITH YOUR RECOMMENDATION. 
          AND THEN COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER IT AT THE DECEMBER 12TH COUNCIL MEETING. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT WAS A LOT. 
          I HAVE ONE LAST SLIDE AT THE END OF ALL OF THIS. 
          I WANT US ALL TO BE SO PROUD OF THIS PLAN, RIGHT? I WANT US TO BE ABLE TO SAY THAT OUR PLAN IS POWERING OUR FUTURE. 
          THAT WE'VE, WE'RE, WE'RE FLEXIBLE AND READY TO ADAPT TO THE CHANGING RISKS. 
          I WANT YOU TO SAY WE HAVE THE CLEANEST ENERGY PORTFOLIO IN TEXAS, CLEANEST IN, UH, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE CLEANEST IN THE COUNTRY THAT WE HAVE INDUSTRY LEADING CUSTOMER ENERGY SOLUTIONS THAT WE'RE PROMOTING RELIABILITY, AFFORDABILITY AND SUSTAINABILITY, PROTECTING OUR MOST VULNERABLE, RESILIENT TO EXTREME WEATHER. 
          THAT THE PLAN IS FLEXIBLE AND INNOVATIVE, THAT IT CAN ADAPT TO CHANGING CONDITIONS. 
          AND OF COURSE, YOU KNOW HOW MUCH THE COMMUNITY HAS BEEN INFORMED, UM, AND INVOLVED AND THAT THE PLAN IS INFORMED BY THE COMMUNITY. 
          SO, UM, PLEASE TELL ME WHAT ELSE WE NEED TO KNOW FROM YOU SO THAT WE CAN INCORPORATE INTO THE PLAN TO HELP YOU BE VERY PROUD TO RECOMMEND IT NEXT TIME THROUGH DISCUSSION. 
          I STILL HAVE A COUPLE OTHER QUESTIONS. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S FOR YOU OR MICHAEL, BUT, UM, THIS, THE, THE PLAN, I MEAN, YOU DON'T, YOU'RE NOT PRESENTING SO WITH A PLAN, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE 
          [02:00:01]
THE INVESTMENT DECISIONS SEEM TO BE IN THE 20 27, 20 30 AS TWO KEY POINTS TO PUT ADDITIONAL LOCAL GENERATION. 
          I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, WHY IS THERE SOMETHING MAGIC ABOUT THOSE YEARS? OR WAS THAT JUST A MODELING EXERCISE? YES, YOU HAD TO PICK SOME YEARS. 
          SO THE PLAN DOES NOT INCLUDE BUILD THIS IN THIS YEAR WITH THIS TECHNOLOGY, RIGHT? THAT'S A PORTFOLIO. 
          OKAY. 
          WE USE THAT TO HELP UNDERSTAND, GET INFORMATION TO SAY WHAT GOES INTO THE PLAN, RIGHT? THE PLAN IS MORE ABOUT, UH, POLICY AND WHICH DIRECTION TO HEAD. 
          AND SO REALLY THAT'S WHAT WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT IS WHAT TOOLS DO YOU HAVE IN YOUR TOOLBOX, RIGHT? IT'S THE VALUES AND THE OBJECTIVE STATEMENTS THAT GUIDE THE NEXT SET OF DECISIONS. 
          AND THEN WHAT, WHAT, HOW, HOW ARE YOU GONNA DO THAT? HOW, WHAT, WHAT'S THE ORDER AT WHICH YOU'RE GONNA PRIORITIZE THESE THINGS? HOW ARE YOU GOING TO EMPHASIZE IT? UM, AND SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION ABOUT 2027 AND 20 30, 20 27 WAS THE FIRST IN OUR MODELING ASSUMPTION THAT WE COULD REASONABLY BUILD SOME OF THOSE UNITS. 
          AND THEN 2030, WE JUST GAVE IT A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME TO SEE LIKE HOW, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN. 
          LET'S GIVE THEM SOME TIME TO WORK AND SEE DO WE NEED TO, YEAH. 
          SO THERE'S NOTHING MAGIC ABOUT YEARS. 
          THERE'S NOTHING MAGICAL ABOUT THOSE YEARS OTHER THAN THERE IS A LEAD TIME TO GETTING SOLUTIONS IN PLACE. 
          THAT'S TRUE FOR THE, UH, CUSTOMER ENERGY SOLUTIONS AS WELL. 
          THE DEMAND SIDE MANAGEMENT, RIGHT? THAT WILL COME IN OVER TIME AND WE HAVE RISKS AND ISSUES NOW THAT WE'RE TRYING TO RESOLVE. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN MY SECOND QUESTION, IT HAS TO DO WITH THE, THE SIZE OF THE INVESTMENTS. 
          WERE YOU TRYING TO SEE KIND OF WHAT'S THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF EITHER PEAKERS OR BATTERIES OR PEAKERS PLUS BATTERIES TO RESOLVE SOME OF THOSE ISSUES? IS THAT BASICALLY WHAT YOU WERE DOING? SO WHAT HAPPENED WAS WHEN WE WERE DOING THE REFINED PORTFOLIOS WITH Y'ALL, WE LOOKED AT, WE SAID WHAT IS THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF, OF PEAKERS AND BATTERIES THAT WE CAN USE TO RESOLVE THE NEAR TERM RISK? AND WE KNEW THAT WE WERE GONNA ADD IN AS WE TALKED ABOUT THE EXTRA TRANSMISSION CAPACITY. 
          UM, AND WE, WE WANTED TO SAY LIKE, WHAT IF WE NEED TO RESOLVE THE RISK BEFORE THAT, RIGHT? HOW COULD WE DO THAT? OKAY. 
          SO THAT'S WHEN WE TRIED WHAT WAS PORTFOLIO 14? THEN WE SAID, WHAT IF, LIKE HOW COULD WE SHOW TRADE-OFFS? WHAT IF WE DID A SIMILAR AMOUNT IN QUANTITY OF JUST ONE OF THOSE TECHNOLOGIES VERSUS THE OTHER? RIGHT? AND SO, UM, THAT'S HOW THOSE CAME TO BE BECAUSE WE HAD GOTTEN LOTS OF QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS ABOUT, WE WANT YOU TO COMPARE BATTERIES TO PEAKERS AND, AND REALLY WE, WE THINK WE NEED 'EM BOTH. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S HELPFUL. 
          SO WE COULD PUT IN ALL KINDS OF DIFFERENT NUMBERS, BUT BASICALLY WHAT YOU'RE SHOW WHAT YOU BELIEVE, THE ANSWER YOU'VE GOTTEN SUPPORTS THE NOTION THAT YOU NEED BOTH OF THESE TECHNOLOGIES. 
          WE NEED BOTH OF THOSE TECHNOLOGIES. 
          YES. 
          AND IT ALSO HELPS TO IDENTIFY KIND OF WHAT GENERAL QUANTITIES WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF THE MINIMUM FLOOR TO, TO SOLVE NEAR TERM RISK UNDER NORMAL CONDITIONS, UNDER EXTREME CONDITIONS. 
          AND IF THE LANDSCAPE CHANGES DRASTICALLY, THEN WE WOULD NEED SOME MORE. 
          OKAY. 
          SO I HAVE SOME OTHER QUESTIONS THAT ARE GONNA BE QUIET 'CAUSE I THINK OTHER FOLKS HAVE THINGS TO SAY. 
          OKAY, SO LET'S GO ONLINE. 
          ANY QUESTIONS ONLINE? I HAVE A, I HAVE A COUPLE. 
          IT'S ABOUT THE, UM, YEAH, IT'S A PEAKER BATTERIES QUESTION AT THAT, UH, CHART ON SLIDE 24. 
          UM, THE RELIABILITY RISK HOURS. 
          YEAH, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IT SAYS. 
          'CAUSE YOU HAVE THE YELLOW LINE, YOU HAVE 110 MEGAWATT BATTERIES, AND THEN IN THE BLUE LINE YOU HAVE LIGHT BLUE LINE, RIGHT? YOU HAVE, I DON'T KNOW, 300 TOTAL MEGAWATT, UM, IN BATTERIES. 
          SO I GUESS I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IT IS THAT, BECAUSE THAT'S MI THERE'S MIMICKING OR MODELING TWO DIFFERENT SCENARIOS OF BATTERY USAGE, I GUESS, YOU KNOW? YEAH. 
          300 MEGAWATTS VERSUS 110 MEGAWATTS. 
          YEAH. 
          THIS IS THREE DIFFERENT MODELED PORTFOLIOS, UM, SHOWING OVER TIME HOW WE INSTALLED DIFFERENT, UH, GENERATION TECHNOLOGIES. 
          AND AGAIN, THE BASE OF THESE PORTFOLIOS IS SHOWN ON THE SLIDE BEFORE. 
          'CAUSE THERE IS ALSO ENERGY EFFICIENCY, DEMAND RESPONSE, REMOTE WIND AND SOLAR, ET CETERA, ET CETERA, ET CETERA. 
          UM, THE THINGS THAT ARE DIFFERENT ABOUT THESE PORTFOLIOS ARE THE AMOUNT OF, UH, LOCAL UTILITY SCALE BATTERIES AND, UM, LOCAL, UH, NATURAL GAS PEAKER UNITS THAT ARE INSTALLED. 
          AND SO THESE, UH, CALL OUT BOXES SHOW HOW MUCH IS OF EACH TECHNOLOGY IS INSTALLED AND WHEN, AND THEN YOU CAN SEE 
          [02:05:01]
THAT, UM, THE, THE LINE THAT'S BEING GRAFTED IS THE RESULTANT RELIABILITY RISK HOUR. 
          UM, RELIABILITY RISK HOUR IS ESSENTIALLY THE TIME WHEN YOU PORTFOLIO WHETHER YOUR GENERATION AND SUPPLY DEMAND. 
          THE, THE SITUATION IN AUSTIN IS SUCH THAT WE ARE AT RISK OF LOCAL OUTAGES, UM, AND WE LIKELY ARE HAVING HIGH CONGESTION COSTS AS WELL. 
          UM, REALLY IF ANY ONE THING WERE TO GO WRONG AT THAT POINT IN TIME, WE COULD HAVE OUTAGES LOCALLY, WHEREAS THE REST OF THE STATE WOULD STILL HAVE POWER. 
          UM, AND THE THINGS THAT COULD GO WRONG COULD BE, UH, DEMAND COULD CONTINUE TO INCREASE. 
          UM, AND WE CAN'T BRING MORE POWER IN, OR WE HAVE NO MORE TO, TO TURN ON. 
          UH, UH, A GENERATOR UNIT COULD, UH, TRIP OFFLINE OR STOP PRODUCING, UM, AND OR TRANSMISSION COULD HAVE AN OUTAGE. 
          UM, AND SO ALL OF THOSE CONTINGENCIES, UH, INCREASE THE RISK TO RELIABILITY. 
          AND, AND WE SEE THIS, UH, PRETTY PREVALENT TODAY. 
          UH, THE NUMBERS OF RELIABILITY RISK ARE HIGHER THAN WHAT ARE DEEMED ACCEPTABLE FOR UH MM-HMM. 
          . 
          BUT THESE COMMUNITIES, BUT THESE DON'T, THESE AREN'T SPECIFIC, UM, PORTFOLIOS, RIGHT. 
          I MEAN, IT JUST SEEMS THE NUMBERS DON'T SEEM TO ADD UP WITH THE PORTFOLIOS. 
          SO, UM, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE, YEAH, BECAUSE THE NUMBERS ON THE, SO THE, THE YELLOW ONE IS PORTFOLIO 14 AND THE NUMBERS HERE, PLUS THE NUMBERS ON THE PREVIOUS SLIDE ADD UP. 
          SO ACTUALLY I THINK IT'S IN THE, I THINK ACTUALLY WE HAVE THE, THE PORTFOLIOS DEFINED. 
          UM, GIVE ME JUST A SECOND. 
          CAN YOU JUMP AHEAD TO SLIDE? I I THINK IT SHOWS A PORTFOLIO 34 14 HAS 125 MEGAWATTS OF STORAGE. 
          UM, AND THEN IT SHOWS, SO, AND THEN, UM, KEEP ON YOUR SCREEN THE, UM, RELIABILITY RISK NUMBERS, AND THEN THIS IS THE TOTAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PORTFOLIOS, UM, THAT YOU SEE. 
          14 HAS 125 MEGAWATTS TOTAL OF LOCAL STORAGE. 
          AND THAT'S THE YELLOW LINE. 
          I SEE. 
          THERE'S SOMETHING GOING ON THERE. 
          THERE'S, SO THERE IS ACTUALLY, OKAY, SO I SEE WHY THE NUMBERS AREN'T ADDING UP. 
          LET ME SHARE THE STORAGE. 
          YEAH. 
          LIKE YEAH, I'M LOOKING AT, YEAH, I WASN'T REALLY REALIZING THERE WAS AN 18 TO 19, SO I THINK THAT'S MY BAD. 
          YEAH. 
          AND THE STORAGE, UM, HERE, WE, I DIDN'T WANNA COVER EVERY SINGLE BOX, BUT THERE'S UTILITY SCALE STORAGE AND THEN THERE'S SUBSTATION LEVEL STORAGE, WHICH COMES IN, IN INCREMENTS OF ABOUT FIVE MEGAWATTS A YEAR. 
          UM, AND SO I DIDN'T PUT A MARKER FOR EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE, UM, JUST BECAUSE I DIDN'T WANNA CLUTTER THE SLIDE. 
          YEAH. 
          AND I GUESS MY ONLY, I MEAN, I JUST DON'T REMEMBER SEEING 18 AND 19 ON SOME OF THOSE GRAPHS, SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN JUST MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE ON SOME OF THOSE. 
          SO, SO THEY'RE AGAIN, YEAH, LIKE SLIDE 47, THEY'RE NOT ON SLIDE 47, 48, WHATEVER. 
          BUT, UH, BUT ANYWAY, THAT, THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          YEAH, I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY THE NUMBERS WEREN'T ADDING UP AND UM, AND I'LL JUST SAY KINDA ONE, ONE LAST THING. 
          UM, I MEAN, I DO THINK WHEN WE JUMP FROM LIKE 14 TO 16 AND THERE'S A BIG JUMP IN LOCAL STORAGE FROM 1 25 TO RIGHT, OR MAYBE I SHOULD SAY DROP FROM LIKE SIX, 700 MEGAWATTS LOCAL STORAGE TO 1 25. 
          AND IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE NOT QUITE MAXIMIZING WHAT WE COULD DO IF PORTFOLIO 14 SELECTED. 
          SO THAT'S, UM, SO WHEN YOU SAY THAT WE'RE NOT SELECTING A PORTFOLIO, SO WE'RE NOT SETTING TARGETS FOR, LET'S SAY LIKE LOCAL STORAGE AND SORT OF PEAKER UNITS, UH, I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO HAVE. 
          IF WE'RE NOT PICKING PORTFOLIOS THAT, HOW ARE WE SETTING TARGETS? 'CAUSE IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE 125 MEGAWATTS LOCAL STORAGE MAYBE ON THE LOW SIDE, BUT IF WE WANTED TO BE HIGHER AGAIN, HOW DO, HOW DOES A RESOURCE GENERATION PLAN ALLOW FOR THAT? OKAY, SO, UM, WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT MAXING OUT, UM, UH, UH, ENERGY EFFICIENCY, DEMAND RESPONSE, UH, ROOFTOP SOLAR AND CUSTOMER SIDED BATTERIES, THAT'S ON THE DEMAND SIDE OF THE EQUATION. 
          THAT'S WHAT THE DNV STUDY DID. 
          AND, UM, THE CUSTOMER CITED BATTERIES THERE ARE INCORPORATED INTO DEMAND RESPONSE. 
          THE STORAGE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS, UH, IS A VARIABLE WHERE WE CAN BUILD, AS YOU KNOW, AS MUCH AS WE THINK WE CAN, WE WANT TO, UM, WITHIN COST CONSTRAINTS, LOOKING AT HOW IT, IT PERFORMS FROM A RELIABILITY PERSPECTIVE. 
          AND I THINK ONE CONSIDERATION IS ALSO LAND CONSTRAINTS, UM, BECAUSE THERE, THERE IS SOME SPACE AMOUNT. 
          SO WHAT WE DID HERE WAS WHEN WE BUILT 14, WE JUST TRIED TO SAY, WHAT'S THE MINIMUM AMOUNT 
          [02:10:01]
WE THINK WE WOULD NEED TO TRY TO REDUCE THE RELIABILITY RISK HOURS? AND WE, WE WERE KIND OF GUESSING, RIGHT? AT THE TIME, ALL WE HAD WAS PORTFOLIOS ONE THROUGH 13 IN FRONT OF US, AND WE WERE JUST KIND OF GUESSING AND WE SAID, WELL, WE, WE THINK, WE THINK THIS, THIS, THIS, UH, COMBINATION MIGHT WORK. 
          AND THE RESULTS SHOWED THAT IT DID A DECENT JOB OF REDUCING RELIABILITY RISK AND OTHER RISKS LIKE LIQUIDITY RISK. 
          UM, WHEN YOU TAKE A COMPARABLE AMOUNT, THE REST OF THE PORTFOLIOS ARE REALLY JUST TO KIND OF ASSESS TRADE OFFS. 
          UM, AND SO WHEN YOU TAKE A COMPARABLE AMOUNT OF, OF MEGAWATTS AND YOU PUT IT ALL INTO STORAGE, UM, WHAT WE SAW IS THERE IS A SLIGHT INCREASE IN COST, BUT NOT A DENT IN THE, UH, RELIABILITY RISK. 
          THE, THE ONLY WAY WE ENDED UP SEEING, UH, NUMBERS THAT BROUGHT THE RELIABILITY RISK DOWN, IT'S NOT A ONE-TO-ONE COMPARISON, BUT IT'S, IT'S WHAT YOU SAW IN 16, 17, AND 18. 
          THOSE HAD MUCH HIGHER VOLUMES OF UTILITY SCALE STORAGE AS WELL AS ALL THE DEMAND SIDE MANAGEMENT. 
          AND THAT ONE ENDED UP COMING IN IN A COST THAT WAS, UH, $1.5 BILLION MORE THAN PORTFOLIO 14. 
          YEAH, NO, I UNDERSTAND. 
          I MEAN, YOU KNOW, UH, 'CAUSE WE COULD, WE COULD RUN A INFINITE NUMBER OF PORTFOLIOS, BUT , WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY FOR THAT. 
          UM, THE OTHER THING THAT KIND OF STOOD OUT TO ME, UH, IN THAT RELIABILITY RISK, OUR ANALYSIS WITH THE YELLOW LINE, WHICH I THINK IS 14, I'M NOT SURE, UM, IS AGAIN, IF WE CAN DO IN TWIN FOR INSTANCE, AGAIN, I'M, THIS IS THE WAY I'M THINKING IS HOW COULD, HOW DOES THIS POTENTIALLY TRANSLATE INTO A, UH, RESOURCE GENERATION PLAN? BUT IF IN 2027 WE CAN DO 110 MEGAWATTS BATTERIES, A HUNDRED MEGAWATT PEAKERS, AND THEN IN 2030 WE CAN DO A HUNDRED MEGAWATT PEAKERS, WELL THEN WHY COULDN'T WE DO 110 MEGAWATT BATTERIES AS WELL IN 2030 IF WE'RE SAYING WE COULD ACCOMPLISH IT IN 2027? RIGHT. 
          SO, SO FOR ME, IT SEEMS LIKE THE 1 25 IS LOW, AND I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK OF, WELL, HOW DO WE 24 SLIDE, HOW CAN WE BE AS AGGRESSIVE AS WE CAN? RIGHT ON THAT PIECE, RIGHT? IF WE'RE NOT GONNA GET THE 500 OR 600 OR 700, THEN WHAT DO WE THINK WE CAN ACCOMPLISH ON THE BATTERIES? DAVID, CAN YOU GO TO SLIDE 24 PLEASE? YEAH, SO I JUST, I JUST WANNA REITERATE THAT WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT PICKING A PARTICULAR PORTFOLIO OR SPECIFYING A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TECHNOLOGY TO BUILD AT A PARTICULAR POINT IN TIME. 
          WE, WE USE THIS TO HELP US GUIDE OUR DIRECTION OF WHAT WE NEED TO DO. 
          SO A PLAN WOULD GIVE US A GENERAL DIRECTION OF WHERE TO GO. 
          WE WOULD TAKE ACTION, GO TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL TO IMPLEMENT THINGS THAT COST, YOU KNOW, MONEY OUTSIDE OF WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE APPROVAL FOR, UM, WHICH WOULD BE ANY OF THESE THINGS. 
          AND THEN WE WOULD IMPLEMENT IT, WE'D BUILD IT, AND THEN WE WOULD SEE HOW THE MARKET HAS CHANGED, HOW THE ENERGY LANDSCAPE HAS CHANGED, AND WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO NEXT. 
          RIGHT? THIS SIMPLY TELLS YOU LIKE THERE'S, LIKE YOU SAID, THERE'S AN INFINITE NUMBER OF POSSIBILITIES, BUT WE ARE HOPING THAT WE HAD ENOUGH TIME, UM, AND ANALYSIS TO LOOK AT A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT, UH, SCENARIOS TO BE ABLE TO DRAW CONCLUSIONS ABOUT WHAT NEXT STEP TO TAKE. 
          AND CERTAINLY THERE WOULD BE ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS AND WHATNOT. 
          SO YES, YOU COULD DO ANY COMBINATION THEREOF, BUT THAT'S NOT THE POINT OF THE MODELING TO TELL YOU EXACTLY WHAT TO BUILD WHEN IT, IT PROVIDES THE TRADE OFFS. 
          AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO LOOK AT HERE. 
          BUT, BUT, BUT THEN AGAIN, WHAT DOES THE RESOURCE GENERATION PLANT SAY ABOUT BATTERIES, FOR INSTANCE? BECAUSE ALL RIGHT, SO GO BACK, YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? LIKE WHAT WOULD THE, WOULD THERE BE A NUMBER? WOULD THERE BE GO BACK TO SLIDE 20. 
          YEAH. 
          SO OFTEN, RIGHT. 
          WHAT, WHAT THE RESOURCE GENERATION PLAN SAYS IS THAT ALL OF THESE TOOLS ARE IMPORTANT TO GO INTO OUR TOOLKIT TO HELP US ACHIEVE OUR GOALS AND MAINTAIN AND MEET THE, UH, COMMUNITY VALUES AND PRIORITIES OF RELIABILITY, AFFORDABILITY, AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY. 
          THESE TOOLS ALL HAVE PROS AND CONS. 
          UM, AND THERE ARE TRADE OFFS ASSOCIATED WITH EACH ONE OF THEM. 
          BUT WHEN YOU HAVE A WELL SUPPLIED TOOLBOX, YOU ARE PREPARED FOR WHATEVER IS COMING IN THE FUTURE. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, WE, WE COULD HAVE A PLAN, FOR EXAMPLE, I DON'T SUGGEST WE DO, BUT WE COULD HAVE A PLAN THAT SAYS, MEET YOUR NEEDS WITH THE RESOURCES THAT ARE THE LOWEST COST POSSIBLE NO MATTER WHAT. 
          RIGHT. 
          IF 
          [02:15:01]
THAT WERE THE CASE, THEN OUR MODELING SHOWS US THAT UTILITY SCALE BATTERIES WOULD NOT BE THE FIRST THING TO BE INSTALLED, RIGHT. 
          BUT WHAT WE ARE PLAN, OUR PLAN SAYS IT'S WORTH IT. 
          THERE ARE BENEFITS WITH UTILITY SCALE BATTERIES, KEEP THOSE IN THE MIX. 
          LET'S MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE INVESTING IN THAT TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY BECAUSE IT HAS ALL OF THESE POSITIVES THAT WE WANNA TAKE ADVANTAGE OF. 
          HIGHLY FLEXIBLE, YOU KNOW, CAN CERTAINLY BE CLEANER, UM, YOU KNOW, EMERGING TECHNOLOGY THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, PROVIDES A LOT OF OPPORTUNITY. 
          SO THE PLAN IS A NOD IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION SAYING ALL OF OUR WORK HAS SAID UTILITY SCALE BATTERIES ARE A GOOD THING. 
          ADD THEM TO YOUR TOOLKIT. 
          ALRIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND, AND I DID GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE EXCEL SPREADSHEET. 
          IT BASICALLY SHOWS THE, THOSE RELIABILITY HOURS ON SLIDE 24, THEY START AROUND 35 AND THEY JUST KEEP GOING UP AND UP. 
          IF WE DO NOTHING, THEY GO UP TO 40, THEN 48, THEN 50 SOMETHING, THEN HIGH FIFTIES AND 60. 
          SO THEY JUST, THEY KEEP GOING UP. 
          YOU DON'T INVEST IN ANYTHING. 
          THEY JUST KIND OF KEEP GOING UP. 
          RIGHT. 
          THUS THE INVESTMENT IS NEEDED THAT WE, SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE. 
          SOMETHING'S NEEDED, SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          YEAH. 
          ON, UM, DO WE HAVE A, I GUESS WE DIDN'T RUN THESE WITHOUT THE, THE IMPORT CAPACITY INCREASES IN 2031. 
          WE DID NOT, WE DID NOT, BUT WE DID KEEP THE IMPORT CAPACITIES INCREASED CONSTANT, RIGHT. 
          FOR ALL OF THE PORTFOLIOS WHERE WE DID INCLUDE IT. 
          SO YOU CAN SEE WHAT THAT, YOU KNOW, IMPACT IS. 
          YEAH, I'M, I'M JUST TRYING TO LOOK LIKE FOR THE, FOR THE LIGHT BLUE ONE, I'M TRYING TO, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT, WHAT, WHAT IS THE, WHAT'S MAKING THE, IS IT THE EXTRA 155 MEGAWATTS OF BATTERIES THAT'S MAKING IT GO DOWN SO SHARP? OR IS THAT THE IMPORT CAPACITY THAT'S MAKING IT GO DOWN SO SHARP? BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IS THE ARROW POINTING TO WHAT HAPPENED AFTER YOU DID IT OR BEFORE YOU, OR BEFORE YOU DID IT? YEAH. 
          SO IF YOU WOULD GO TO SLIDE 30 24, UM, SO IN THE YEAR THAT WE INSTALLED THE BATTERIES, THE RELIABILITY OF RISK STILL REMAINED HIGH. 
          IN THIS CASE IT WAS AT A PEAK ON THE BLUE CHART. 
          AND THEN AFTER YOU INSTALLED THE IMPORT CAPACITY THAT COLLAPSES THE, SO THE, THE, THE TREND LINE OF, SO, SO IF YOU'D IN, IN 2030, SO IN 2030, IF YOU'D INSTALLED THOSE BATTERIES BUT DIDN'T DO THE IMPORT CAPACITY, YOU'D EXPECT THAT LINE TO CONTINUE UP YES. 
          OR STAY RELATIVELY STABLE OR STAY, IT DEPENDS ON WHAT THE LOAD GROWTH IS, BUT IF MEMORY SERVES, THERE WAS LOAD GROWTH YEAR OVER YEAR. 
          SO YES. 
          OKAY. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          THANKS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, BACK TO 20, PLEASE. 
          ANY OTHER FEEDBACK? I MENTIONED THIS, THAT THE, UM, WORKING GROUP, BUT I'LL JUST SAY AGAIN, LIKE ACHIEVING DECARBONIZATION I THINK IS ONE GOAL, BUT ENVIRONMENTAL, UM, SUSTAINABILITY GOES BEYOND THAT. 
          SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT ALSO ADDRESS AIR QUALITY. 
          OKAY. 
          I WAS ACTUALLY GONNA MAKE THE SAME POINT THAT ONE OF THE BIG CONCERNS, AND I'VE MENTIONED THIS BEFORE IN AUSTIN, YOU KNOW, WE'RE PART OF A REGIONAL AIR SHED AND THE DATA INDICATES THAT BETWEEN 2020 AND 23, THE, UM, AVERAGE OF THE FOURTH HIGHEST OZONE LEVEL WAS OVER THE NON-ATTAINMENT, UH, THRESHOLD ESTABLISHED BY EPA MEANING, UM, WELL I TEND TO DOUBT THE NEW EPA WILL DO MUCH, BUT, UM, UH, , UM, PEOPLE'S HEALTH ARE BEING IMPACTED BY HIGH OZONE LEVELS. 
          OF COURSE WE HAVE DIFFERENT SOURCES OF NOX. 
          THE ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS ARE NOT THE ONLY SOURCE OF NOX, BUT ADDING TO THE, TO THE NOX TOTAL FROM OUR POWER PLANTS IS A REAL CONCERN. 
          AND SO, UM, THINKING ABOUT HOW WE WOULD EITHER LIMIT THOSE EMISSIONS SO THEY, SO THEY WOULD GO DOWN OVER TIME OR MAKE SURE AT LEAST THEY DON'T GO UP OR WE'RE HELPING OTHER POINT SOURCES IN THE AREA LOWER THEIRS OR SOME COMBINATION. 
          UM, BECAUSE OTHERWISE WE'RE GONNA BE ACTUALLY ADDING TO THE, TO THE LOCAL POLLUTION PROBLEM. 
          YES. 
          BY BUILDING NEW PEAKERS. 
          I DO, I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT THAT UP 'CAUSE I, I FAILED TO MENTION IT EARLIER, BUT THE, UM, PEAKER UNITS THAT WE MODELED INCLUDE SCR SELECTIVE CATALYTIC REDUCTION AND WE WOULD INTEND TO KEEP, RIGHT. 
          THAT CAN REDUCE THE NOX. 
          MY UNDERSTANDING IS ON OUR CURRENT, UM, 
          [02:20:01]
SANDHILL PEAKERS, THE SCRS REDUCE, UH, NOX BETWEEN 80 AND 95%. 
          UM, AND SO THAT CERTAINLY WOULD BE INCLUDED. 
          AND THEN, BUT I KNOW THAT THAT'S NOT ENOUGH, RIGHT. 
          JUST TO KNOW THAT IT'S ON THAT AND SO LOCAL AIR QUALITY AND, AND, BUT AGAIN, YOU'RE, YOU'RE THE MODELING WE DID, AND IT'S IN YOUR APPENDIX COMPARING 14, 15, 16, 17 SHOWED THAT 14 DID INCREASE KNOCKS OVER THE PERIOD COMPARED TO, IN OTHER WORDS, ADDING NEW PEAKERS DID ADD ADDITIONAL KNOCKS TO THE AREA COMPARED TO NOT ADDING ADDITIONAL PEAKERS. 
          NO, IT DIDN'T. 
          SO YES. 
          SO, AND IT WASN'T, IT WASN'T TWICE AS MUCH, BUT IT WAS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT. 
          YEAH. 
          SO LOCAL AIR QUALITY ABSOLUTELY. 
          WITH AND EMISSIONS CONTROLS AS A WHOLE FOR ALL, ALL DIFFERENT KINDS OF, UM, EMISSIONS. 
          YES. 
          OKAY. 
          ANY MORE DISCUSSION? OKAY. 
          WHY DON'T, GO AHEAD. 
          I HAD ONE OTHER QUESTION. 
          SO, UM, THAT SLIDE SAYS USE EFFICIENT PEAKERS WHEN NEEDED. 
          AND I THINK THAT NEEDS SOME DEFINITION. 
          'CAUSE I DON'T THINK WE ALL PROBABLY HAVE AN AGREED DEFINITION OF NEED AND SO, AND YES. 
          AND SO WE WERE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT, THEY ARE ESSENTIALLY THE COMPONENT OF THE PORTFOLIO THAT IS YOUR LAST RESORT, BUT FOR THE LESS EFFICIENT RIGHT. 
          OTHER GENERATION THAT YOU WOULD HAVE. 
          SO, SO YOU WOULD SAY ONLY WHEN NOTHING ELSE IS GONNA SOLVE THE, THE EITHER RELIABILITY OR CONGESTION RISK, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT EARLIER. 
          UM, THEN YOU WOULD USE THESE UNITS AND YOU'D USE THE MOST EFFICIENT ONES FIRST. 
          WELL, OUR USE IS NEED DEFINE IT DEFINED IN TERMS OF RISING PRICES THE WAY YOU'VE DEFINED YOUR RELIABILITY RISK HOURS. 
          OR IS IT DEFINED IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, YOU SAID THOSE RISK HOURS THAT YOU KNOW IF ANY ONE THING GOES WRONG, THEN YOU COULD BE AT RISK OF AN OUTAGE. 
          ARE THEY THERE TO PREVENT AN OUTAGE IF SOMETHING GOES WRONG? I THINK THOSE ONE LEADS TO MORE RUNNING OF THOSE UNITS THAN THE OTHER. 
          YEAH. 
          THEY ARE THERE TO AVOID THE RELIABILITY AND AFFORDABILITY RISK TO MITIGATE THAT, THAT WE ARE EXPERIENCING NOW AND THAT WE WOULD CONTINUE TO EXPERIENCE MOVING FORWARD. 
          SO THE RISK IN AFFORDABILITY IS RELATED TO THOSE CONGESTION COSTS THAT WE SAW. 
          THE RISK IN RELIABILITY IS RELATED TO RELIABILITY RISK HOURS. 
          AND SO FUNDAMENTALLY THEY'RE THE LAST UNIT THAT WOULD BE DISPATCHED IN THE ERCOT MARKET. 
          UM, AND SO THAT IN AND OF ITSELF MEANS BECAUSE WE, WE PICKED PEAKERS AS OPPOSED TO, FOR EXAMPLE, A DIFFERENT TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY LIKE THAT COULD BE PROVIDE A LOCAL SOLUTION LIKE A COMBINED CYCLE, RIGHT? SO BY THEIR FUNDAMENTAL NATURE, THEY'LL ONLY BE USED WHEN NEEDED. 
          UM, AND WE WILL MONITOR THAT AND WE KNOW THAT THROUGH OUR CAPACITY FACTOR AND IF WE NEED TO PUT LIMITS ON THAT, WE COULD DO IT IN A NUMBER OF WAYS AS WE DISCUSSED EARLIER TODAY. 
          YEAH, I I DON'T NECESSARILY DEFINE ALL THAT AS A NEED. 
          UM, I, I GUESS I WOULD JUST HOPE THERE'S SOME WORDS IN WHATEVER Y'ALL ARE DRAFTING THAT EXPLAIN WHAT YOU PLAN TO DO. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, THE OTHER CONCEPT I PERSONALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE, UM, YOU KNOW, SO TAKE, TAKE IT AS INPUT, UM, IS, UH, SOMETHING I SAID IN MY SURVEY, WHICH IS I THINK YOU CAN ESTABLISH THE DMV STUDY AS SORT OF PRIMARY TARGETS OR GOALS OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO SAY. 
          AND I KNOW YOU'RE NOT TRYING TO CREATE A PORTFOLIO, UNDERSTAND THAT, AND THEN, UM, BUT TREAT THEM AS SORT OF A STARTING POINT AND SAY WHAT THAT YOU'RE GONNA CONTINUE TO LOOK AT WAYS TO HAVE SORT OF STRETCH GOALS. 
          SO, UM, IF WE, IF, IF DMV TELLS US, YOU KNOW, WE THINK THERE'S ABOUT 430 MEGAWATTS OF LOCAL SOLAR, UM, AVAILABLE OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS, WELL LET'S, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASSUMING, BUT LET'S SHOOT FOR MORE OR SIMILARLY ON ENERGY EFFICIENCY OR DEMAND RESPONSE. 
          UM, YEAH. 
          SO YEAH, I THINK WE UNDERSTOOD THAT YOU, THAT'S IN THE, UM, ON SLIDE 18 UNDER, UM, FLEXIBLE TARGETS. 
          SO WE DEFINITELY HEAR YOU OKAY. 
          UH, THERE AND UH, WE'LL SEE HOW WE CAN FIT THAT IN. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH, I GUESS KIND OF LIKE, I THINK RO WAS GETTING TO, I, I AM SUPPORTIVE OF HAVING GOALS LIKE OUR, IN THE CURRENT PLAN AND HAVE BEEN IN ALL THE PAST PLANS THAT ARE CLEAR THAT HAVE EARS AND MEGAWATTS AND PERCENTAGES. 
          [02:25:01]
UM, THERE'S NEVER BEEN ANY, YOU KNOW, HARSH CONSEQUENCE FOR MISSING THOSE. 
          BUT I DO THINK THAT THEY ARE IMPORTANT FOR MEASURING PROGRESS ALONG THE WAY AND WITHOUT THEM, IT DOESN'T REALLY SEEM LIKE IT'S A PLAN. 
          UM, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS, BUT IT DOESN'T REALLY SEEM LIKE A PLAN. 
          UM, AND YOU KNOW, JUSTIN, YOU'RE ASKING FOR FEEDBACK. 
          I'LL SAY AGAIN HERE, LIKE I DON'T THINK THE GAS SHOULD, THE BUILDING NEW GAS SHOULD BE IN THE TOOLKIT AT ALL. 
          OKAY. 
          NOTED. 
          I, UH, CHAIR, UH, AS WE MOVE ON TO ITEM FIVE, UH, WITH RESPECT TO ITEM FIVE FOR ANY STATEMENT, ACTION OR VOTE I OFFER, I WILL NOT TAKE FAYETTE INTO CONSIDERATION IN MY ANALYSIS. 
          JUST WANNA MAKE THAT STATEMENT CLEAR. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          WE'RE DONE. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION? UM, LISA'S PRESENTATION. 
          SO REMIND US ONCE MORE. 
          NOVEMBER 27TH. 
          NOVEMBER 27TH IS YES. 
          WHEN, UM, CIVIL WILL BE POSTED WITH THE, UM, UH, THE PLAN AND THEN, UM, I THINK YOU'RE VOTING ON A RECOMMENDATION ON DECEMBER 2ND. 
          OKAY. 
          AND WE'RE WORKING FEVERISHLY TO GET YOU THE PLAN OKAY. 
          WITH ALL THE DETAILS AND YOUR FEEDBACK INCORPORATED. 
          OKAY. 
          [5. Recommend approval of a recommendation on the Austin Energy Resource, Generation, and Climate Protection Plan.]
SO LET'S TALK ABOUT NUMBER FIVE, THE RESOLUTION. 
          SO DO YOU WANNA KICK THAT OFF KABA? SURE. 
          CAN, CAN WE MAKE THIS BIG ENOUGH TO READ IF EVERYBODY ALREADY READ THE EZ SECTIONS, THEN MAYBE I WOULD JUST START WITH IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. 
          UM, BUT I'LL JUST SAY LIKE IN GENERAL, THIS WAS INTENDED TO JUST LAY THE GROUNDWORK FOR PAST ACTION THAT THE CITY HAS TAKEN THAT IS RELEVANT TO, UM, THE DECISION HERE AND ESPECIALLY AROUND THE ISSUE OF FOSSIL FUELS AND, UM, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY ADDING TO THAT INFRASTRUCTURE AND, UH, USE OF FOSSIL FUELS AND INCREASING EMISSIONS. 
          AND, UM, THERE ARE SEVERAL PLANS AND RESOLUTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN PASSED THAT, UM, COMMIT TO NOT DOING THAT. 
          SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHY I'M CONTINUING TO SAY WE SHOULDN'T DO IT. 
          UM, AND WE'VE GOT A CLIMATE CRISIS, UH, WORSENING AND YOU KNOW, SO THIS JUST KIND OF LAYS OUT THOSE AS WELL AS TRYING TO ADDRESS, UM, SOME OF THE OTHER ISSUES THAT WE HAVE. 
          UM, IF WE CAN SCROLL DOWN, YOU KNOW, JUST KIND OF SOME OF THE OTHER ISSUES WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO TACKLE, UM, YOU KNOW, AROUND RELIABILITY AND CUSTOMER SIDE OF GENERATION, THE ROLE OF THAT AND EFFICIENCY AND OTHER, OTHER RESOURCES, UM, TO HELP ADDRESS THOSE CHALLENGES. 
          SO I'LL PAUSE AND IF ANYBODY HAS COMMENTS OR ANYTHING ON THE WHERE AS, UM, WHY DON'T WE TALK ABOUT THOSE FIRST AND THEN GET INTO THE BEER RESOLVED. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          CAN WE MAKE IT A MEAN, WELL THERE, YEAH, THERE IS, UH, ONE OF THEM WHERE IT MAY NEED TUNING UP IN TERMS OF, UH, AUSTIN ENERGY DURING YURI HAVING SUFFICIENT RESOURCES TO MEET CUSTOMERS' NEEDS. 
          ARE YOU, UM, LOOKING AT THE CURRENT ONE OR DID YOU PRINT OUT AN OLD ONE? 'CAUSE I THINK I DELETED THAT. 
          WHO? OKAY. 
          I THOUGHT IT WAS AT AUSTIN ENERGY'S RECOMMENDATION. 
          OKAY. 
          OR I DON'T KNOW IF THAT, I DON'T, THEY HAD A CONCERN ABOUT IT. 
          OKAY. 
          I WAS THERE ANY, ANYTHING ELSE ON THE WHEREAS SECTIONS ANYBODY HAS CHRISTIAN OR CONCERN ABOUT? OKAY. 
          UM, CAN WE JUST SCROLL UP JUST A TINY BIT SO WE CAN SEE THE START OF THE SECTION? THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, SO THE FIRST, YOU KNOW, KIND OF PIECE BEFORE WE GET INTO THE NUMBERS IS TRYING TO RECOGNIZE THAT THE PLAN IS, IS A VISION DOCUMENT SETTING, SETTING GOALS TO, TO WORK TOWARDS. 
          AND, UM, AND THEN ESTABLISHING 
          [02:30:02]
SOME OF THEM ARE REESTABLISHING FROM THE EXISTING PLAN GOALS THAT SHOULD BE INCORPORATED INTO THAT. 
          WE DID NOT PUT ANY SPECIFIC NUMBERS IN HERE. 
          UM, I THINK THAT'S KIND OF, I GUESS I DIDN'T DO THAT BECAUSE I DIDN'T KNOW WHERE EVERYBODY LANDED ON THAT TOPIC. 
          LIKE WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S GENERALLY SUPPORT FOR MOVING IN THIS DIRECTION OF, UM, I GUESS THERE ARE A FEW NUMBERS IN HERE, BUT YOU KNOW, THERE'S NOT LIKE MEGAWATTS OF STORAGE OR EVEN MEGAWATTS FOR OR OF LOCAL RESOURCES OR ANYTHING. 
          SO WE COULD ADD THAT IN THERE. 
          BUT, UM, IT'S MORE ABOUT MEETING THE KIND OF TOP LINE GOALS OF GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS GETTING TO, TO CARBON FREE, WHICH IS IN THE EXISTING PLAN SHUTTING DOWN FAA, WHICH IS IN THE EXISTING PLAN. 
          UM, THE ADDING ESTABLISHED METHODS FOR REDUCING EMISSIONS FROM THE NATURAL GAS UNITS ALSO IS IN THE EXISTING PLAN. 
          IT WAS ACTUALLY ENVISIONED THAT THAT WOULD ALREADY BE HAPPENING. 
          UM, THE ONE THAT ISN'T EXPLICITLY IN THERE IS THE ONE ABOUT LOCAL AIR POLLUTANTS. 
          UM, BUT THAT HAS COME UP A LOT. 
          UH, IT'S AND IS A GROWING PROBLEM FOR THE, FOR THE REGION. 
          SO ADDING THAT IN THERE AS NUMBER FOUR THAT WE NEED TO NOT JUST FOCUS ON CARBON EMISSIONS OR GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, BUT ALSO AIR POLLUTANTS. 
          THE NUMBER FIVE IS ESSENTIALLY WHAT IS IN THE EXISTING PLAN IN THAT. 
          UM, IT'S, IT'S JUST BASICALLY SAYING TO, UM, USE RENEWABLE ENERGY TO BACKFILL FILL, UM, FOSSIL FUEL USE. 
          NUMBER SIX IS NEW AND KIND OF IN LINE WITH WHAT WE'VE ALL BEEN TALKING ABOUT HERE IN TERMS OF TRANSMISSION. 
          AND THEN THIS NUMBER SEVEN, I GUESS WE HAVE TO SCROLL A LITTLE TO SEE, CAN WE SCROLL DOWN IN JUST A BIT TO SEE THE REST OF IT? THANKS. 
          OH, TOO MUCH. 
          WE WANNA SEE ALL OF SEVEN AT ONCE. 
          THANKS. 
          CAN I ASK YOU A CLARIFYING QUESTION? WHEN YOU SAY IT'S IN THE EXISTING PLAN, DO YOU MEAN THE 2030 PLAN? MM-HMM. 
          . 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, I CAN'T REMEMBER HOW MANY, THERE'S BEEN NOW FIVE, FOUR OR FIVE OF THESE PLANS AND, UM, YOU KNOW, USUALLY THEY, THEY BUILD ON EACH OTHER. 
          UM, YEAH. 
          SO SEVEN IS, YOU KNOW, FOCUSED ON THOSE, UH, LOCAL RESOURCES, WHICH I THINK IS IN ALIGNMENT WITH WHAT AE IS SAYING TO, UM, TO DO THOSE INVESTMENTS, UH, AT THE CUST KIND OF CUSTOMER SIGHTED CUSTOMER SIDE RESOURCES. 
          UM, IT DOES KIND OF CALL OUT SOME SPECIFIC THINGS THAT NEED TO BE DONE AND, AND THAT, YOU KNOW, LIKE INCLUDING RATE CHANGES, PROGRAMS THAT NEED TO BE DEVELOPED . 
          AND THEN, UM, LET'S SEE. 
          OH YEAH, SO THEN NUMBER EIGHT IS JUST TRYING TO ADDRESS THE, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE POSSIBILITY OF NOT BEING ABLE TO SHUT DOWN THE EXISTING GAS FIRE GENERATION, YOU KNOW, WHAT THEY ALREADY HAVE, UM, BY 2035, YOU KNOW, DUE TO RELIABILITY OR EXCESSIVE COST CONCERNS. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, THAT THEN THEY SHOULD USE CARBON CAPTURE AND SEQUESTRATION ON THAT, YOU KNOW, IF THAT IS THE MOST AFFORDABLE OPTION. 
          OKAY. 
          BUT WHEN IT SAYS BY 2035, DO YOU MEAN BY THE END OF 2035 OR DOES THAT MEAN BY THE END OF 2034, WHATEVER? YEAH, , I MEAN, LET'S BE REAL, LIKE, IS IT GONNA CHANGE ANYTHING? WELL, I THINK IF IT'S A 10 YEAR PLAN, THEN BY THE END MAKES MORE SENSE. 
          UH, 'CAUSE THE, ALL THE MODELING WE DID KIND OF SHOWED THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO NEED THOSE GUESTS UNLESS, UNLESS WE GET TO EXACTLY WHAT IS SAID HERE, WHICH IS THOSE, UM, TECHNOLOGIES EXIST AND COULD BE IMPLEMENTED BY THEN. 
          YEAH, I HAVE NO OBJECTION TO SAYING BY THE END OF, YOU KNOW, I THINK THESE DATES USUALLY ARE SQUISHY ANYWAY. 
          YEAH. 
          [02:35:02]
I I GUESS LIKE, UM, I'M SORRY, DID YOU HAVE ANY? NO. 
          AND THEN I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, UM, CAN, CAN YOU TALK AGAIN IN FIVE, UM, ABOUT THE SPECIFIC PERCENTAGES FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY? IS THAT BASICALLY THE IDEA THAT WE WOULD COVER OUR LOAD WITH RENEWABLE ENERGY PLUS THE ELECTRONS FROM THE NUCLEAR PLANT? IS THAT BASICALLY HOW YOU GET TO YEAH, WHICH IS THOSE, THE, THE NUMBERS THERE I THINK ARE MAYBE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WERE IN THE, UM, I THINK IN THE EXISTING PLAN IT WAS ALL STATED IN TERMS OF CARBON FREE. 
          OKAY. 
          BUT THAT RESULTED IN AE INTERPRETING THAT TO MEAN LIKE WHEN WE STARTED OFF THE MODELING, THEY MODELED THE CURRENT PLAN IS ONLY DOING 65% RENEWABLE AND THEN HAVING THIS BIG GAP IN GENERATION COMPARED TO LOAD. 
          UM, SO THIS WAS REALLY JUST TO KIND OF, IF WE CAN SCROLL BACK UP TO C NUMBER FIVE. 
          YEAH. 
          JUST TO CLARIFY, I MEAN, I DON'T THINK THAT WAS NOT THE INTENT OF THE EXISTING PLAN. 
          UM, BUT THIS IS REALLY JUST TO KIND OF CLARIFY THAT THOUGH, THE SPECIFIC, WE'RE NOT LOOKING TO BE SHORT GENERATION, THE SPECIFIC PERCENTAGE ISN'T AS IMPORTANT AS THE CONCEPT OF YOU'RE COVERING YOUR LOAD WITH CARBON FREE GENERATION YEAH. 
          AND MAKING PROGRESS ALONG THE WAY. 
          UM, DO ITEMS, UH, THREE AND EIGHT, UH, PRECLUDE BUILDING LOCAL RESOURCES LIKE THE NEW PEAKERS THAT WERE DISCUSSED EARLIER TODAY? UM, I DON'T THINK THREE. 
          WELL, LIKE GUESS IT DEPENDS IF IT'S CUMULATIVE OR I MEAN THREE, THREE COULD, OR IT COULDN'T DEPENDING ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY REPLACED, I GUESS, EXISTING RESOURCES. 
          RIGHT. 
          IF IT ACTUALLY REPLACED WHAT THEY HAVE. 
          UM, BUT THAT'S NOT HOW THEY MODELED IT. 
          UM, SO I WOULD SORT OF, BUT I THINK IN THE SENSE THAT THEY MODELED IT FOR MORE PEAKERS IF YOU LOOK YEAH. 
          LIKE IT'S MORE TOTAL GAS GENERATION OPERATING. 
          RIGHT. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          BUT, UM, I THINK THAT THE EMISSIONS, UM, NUMBER FOUR I THINK WOULD BE MORE THE LIMITING FACTOR. 
          BUT AGAIN, IF THEY SWAPPED THEM OUT, I GUESS IT WOULDN'T TECHNICALLY PRECLUDE THAT I, BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK NUMBER FOUR, YOU KNOW, I, I LIVE ON THE EAST SIDE, I HAVE A KID, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE HAVE, WE HAVE POLLUTED AIR. 
          LIKE WE CANNOT IGNORE THAT REALITY. 
          AND, UM, EVERY SINGLE PERSON THAT I JUST CASUALLY EVEN COME IN CONTACT WITH THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY LIVE ON THE EAST SIDE, THE FIRST THING THEY ASK IS WHERE ARE THESE GONNA BE BUILT? BECAUSE I THINK THEY INTUITIVELY KNOW IT'S GONNA BE ON THE EAST SIDE. 
          UM, SO THERE'S, THERE'S A CONCERN THERE WITH THE, YOU KNOW, NOT JUST FROM THE CLIMATE PERSPECTIVE, BUT FROM THE, THE HEALTH PERSPECTIVE. 
          YEAH. 
          SO, SO IT'S RELATIVE TO LIKE THE PLANTS WE HAVE TODAY, NOT, NOT WHAT WAS RETIRED SINCE 2020. 
          UH OH, DO YOU MEAN LIKE THE EMISSIONS LIKE BASELINE? WELL, YEAH, LIKE, SO WE RETIRED 725 MEGAWATTS SINCE LIKE 2020. 
          RIGHT. 
          THE, THAT ONE SLIDE. 
          SO YEAH, NO, I MEAN I THINK THIS WOULD BE LIKE STARTING, THIS WOULD BE STARTING NOW, BUT I MEAN, IT JUST SAYS TO REDUCE, IT DOESN'T SAY LIKE, THERE'S NOT SPECIFIC NUMBERS, BUT YES, IT WOULD BE REDUCED FROM TODAY, NOT REDUCED FROM MAYBE THAT BEARS CLARIFICATION. 
          I DON'T KNOW. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, I GUESS IT'S LIKE ON ON EIGHTH, LIKE THERE WAS SOME CRITICISM EARLIER BROUGHT UP ABOUT CARBON CAPTURE. 
          SO I GUESS LIKE IS IT, IF IF IT DOESN'T MATERIALIZE, WOULD THAT, WOULD NUMBER EIGHT BE A HARD STOP ON ANY LIKE GAS IN THE, IN THE, IN, IN THE LOW TO EXISTING AND OR ANYTHING THAT WERE BUILT BETWEEN NOW AND THEN? WELL, ONE OF THE, 
          [02:40:01]
I MEAN THE UNIT THAT HAS THE MOST EMISSIONS IS THE COMBINED CYCLE. 
          UM, THAT I WOULD ASSUME IT IS AT LEAST POSSIBLE TO DO CARBON CAPTURE ON. 
          I GUESS I WAS JUST, I MEAN, GENUINELY ASKING A QUESTION LIKE CAN YOU DO IT ON PEAKERS FOR ANY SORT OF, I DON'T KNOW EITHER. 
          YEAH, I DON'T KNOW EITHER. 
          UM, THEY RAMP QUICKLY AND I KNOW THAT LIKE A MEAN SCRUBBING NEEDS LIKE PRETTY CONSISTENT YEAH. 
          LEVELS. 
          YEAH. 
          SO I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE PEAKERS, BUT I WOULD ASSUME THEY COULD DO IT ON THE COMBINED CYCLE. 
          WELL, BUT DOES THAT INCLUDE THE PEAKERS THOUGH, NUMBER EIGHT? I MEAN, I GUESS SO. 
          UM, MAYBE WE SHOULD, I WOULD BE FINE WITH LIKE REFINING THAT TO SAY, I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME OTHER METHOD OF, YOU KNOW, DIRECT AIR CARBON REMOVAL SPECIFICALLY TO ACCOUNT FOR PEAKERS IF, AS LONG AS THEY'RE NOT, UM, ADDITIONAL GENERATION. 
          BUT I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW. 
          I GUESS I THINK WE'VE GOTTA LIKE LIVE WITHIN OUR MEANS TO BE HONEST. 
          LIKE, AND BY THAT I MEAN CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL AND WE NEED TO FIND A WAY TO GET THIS DONE. 
          UM, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US PLANNING FOR SUCCESS AND IF THE NEXT UPDATE COMES AROUND AND IT'S LOOKING, YOU KNOW, LIKE WE'RE NOWHERE NEAR THIS, THEN WE CAN ADJUST AGAIN. 
          BUT WHAT DIRECTION DO WE WANNA GO IS KIND OF, I GUESS THE QUESTION THAT I SEE BEFORE US NOW. 
          YEAH. 
          BUT I HEAR YOU THAT LIKE, YEAH. 
          DOES THAT MEAN THAT WE COULDN'T KEEP THE EXISTING PEAKERS? I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW. 
          THIS IS AGAIN WHERE I WISH THAT LIKE IF CARBON CAPTURE WAS GONNA BE ON THE TABLE, THAT WE HAD DONE SOME RESEARCH AND MODELED IT AND COULD HAVE AN INTELLIGENT CONVERSATION ABOUT IT. 
          YEAH, I GUESS LIKE, I MEAN, NOT JUST THE EXISTING ONE. 
          I MEAN THERE'S, THERE'VE BEEN SOME OTHER, SO WOULD THIS PRECLUDE ANY OF THE OTHER LIKE PORTFOLIOS THAT ADDED PEAKERS TO THE SYSTEM? I THINK IT PRECLUDES ADDING PEAKERS FROM A REASONABLE STANDPOINT. 
          YEAH. 
          LIKE, I MEAN I COULD IMAGINE SOME WAY THAT YOU COULD WORK WITHIN THIS TO ADD THEM, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU WOULD GO TO THE BOTHER. 
          OKAY. 
          SO I, I'M, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IT RELATIVE TO LIKE THE, THE 18, LIKE THE SCENARIOS AND STUFF LIKE THE PEAKER PLUS BATTERY BATTERIES SCENARIO. 
          I CAN'T FIND . 
          YEAH, I GUESS, UM, I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CARBON CAPTURE ON PEAKERS AS OUR BACKUP PLAN, IT'S JUST HARD FOR ME TO ACCEPT THAT THAT IS MORE REALISTIC THAN LIKE DEPLOYING MORE LOCAL SOLAR, WHICH, YOU KNOW, MODELING THE BATTERIES WITHOUT THE LOCAL SOLAR IS KIND OF LIKE MA MODELING THE GAS PLANTS WITHOUT ANY GAS, YOU KNOW, LIKE YEAH, IT DIDN'T WORK. 
          WE LEARNED THAT IN THE FIRST ROUND. 
          RIGHT. 
          THAT'S WHY WE ADDED ALL THE LOCAL SOLAR TO OUR PORTFOLIO. 
          I THINK THEY DID MODEL THE 400, THEY MODELED THE DNV SOLAR. 
          RIGHT, RIGHT. 
          THEY DIDN'T MODEL, BUT I MEAN WE, I'M SAYING WE LEARNED THAT IN OUR FIRST RIGHT IN 12. 
          YEAH. 
          YOU NEED TO 13, RIGHT? YEAH. 
          ANYWAY, SORRY. 
          YEAH, I MEAN, WELL, I MEAN PERHAPS, I MEAN WE'RE, WE'RE NOT ALWAYS IN LIKE THE POCKET PRICE SEPARATION ISSUES. 
          LIKE, I MEAN, IN THEORY THE BATTERIES COULD CHARGE OFF THE GRID, LIKE, AND THEN YEAH. 
          UM, YEAH. 
          FAIR ENOUGH. 
          YEAH, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THAT'S NOT HOW THE MODELING WORKS OUT. 
          I DON'T KNOW, BUT I HEAR YOU. 
          MAYBE MORE TRANSMISSION EXPANSION. 
          I'M DOWN FOR MORE TRANSMISSION. 
          IT'S JUST LIKE IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THINGS THAT ARE HARD TO BUILD, RIGHT? THIS AGAIN, IT'S LIKE, IS THAT ACTUALLY EASIER THAN US USING OUR AVAILABLE ROOFTOP SPACE HERE? LIKE YEAH, I MEAN I GET LIKE THERE'S, LIKE, THERE'S, THERE'S OTHER, LIKE, I GUESS WE WE'RE ALSO TALKING ABOUT NOT MAYBE NOT HAVING TO HAVE LIKE CARBON CAPTURE ON THOSE SPECIFIC UNITS, BUT IF THERE WAS LIKE DIRECT AIR CAPTURE OR SOME OTHER CAPTURE OF OTHER CARBON, LIKE DOES THAT QUALIFY UNDER EIGHT? NO, BUT I THINK IF WE WANTED TO WRITE IT IN A WAY THAT IS LIMITING ENOUGH THAT IT IS ABOUT POTENTIALLY MAINTAINING THE EXISTING FLEET IF NEEDED, I COULD SUPPORT THAT. 
          I MEAN, I, YOU KNOW, I'M SURE YOU KNOW, DIRECT AIR CAPTURE IS LIKE INCREDIBLY ENERGY INTENSIVE AND THEREFORE VERY EXPENSIVE CURRENTLY. 
          YEAH. 
          HOPEFULLY THAT CHANGES. 
          I MEAN, HONESTLY WE NEED IT TO CHANGE. 
          UM, BUT I THINK IF 
          [02:45:01]
WE WERE TALKING ABOUT USING IT FOR LIKE A SMALL AMOUNT OF PEAKER USE, YOU KNOW, THEN MAYBE THAT'S, YOU KNOW, AND THAT TRULY IS, YOU KNOW, OUR ONLY OPTION THEN WHATEVER. 
          I, I WOULD BE FINE WITH PUTTING THAT IN HERE AS A BACKSTOP. 
          I HAVE A PROCESS QUESTION. 
          UM, IF, I MEAN, WE HAVE SOME CHOICES, RIGHT? WE CAN TAKE ACTION ON THIS TONIGHT. 
          WE CAN ALSO REFINE IT, RIGHT? YEAH. 
          UM, I MEAN WE CAN REFINE IT RIGHT NOW. 
          YEAH. 
          MY QUESTION IS, CAN IT BE, IF, IF WE DIDN'T TAKE ACTION TONIGHT, CAN IT STILL BE LISTED ON THE NEXT MEETING? I MEAN, I WANNA WORK ON IT SOME MORE RIGHT NOW, BUT I'M JUST SAYING IT CAN STILL BE LISTED ON THE NEXT WELL, AND PHILOSOPHICALLY I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS TOO BECAUSE IF WE'RE CONSIDERING THE PLAN IN THE NEXT MEETING, WHY WOULDN'T THESE BE PRESENTED AS POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS TO THE PLAN IF NEEDED? IT SEEMS LIKE IT WOULD BE A CLEARER MESSAGE FROM THIS COMMISSION IF IT WERE ALL IN ONE COMPREHENSIVE DOCUMENT. 
          THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I'M GETTING AT, IS IF WE HAD THE PLAN BEFORE US, IT WOULD BE EASIER TO ALMOST SAY, OKAY, HERE'S YOUR PLAN AND HERE'S SOME OF THE, THE GUARDRAILS WE WANNA ESTABLISH AS PART OF THAT PLAN. 
          OR, YOU KNOW, WE COULD ALSO SAY NO ON THE PLAN. 
          RIGHT. 
          BUT WE DON'T, WE DON'T HAVE THE PLAN IN FRONT OF US. 
          I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, AND, AND MAYBE IT'S FOR AMY, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT SURE THE, LIKE, LIKE ARE WE ABLE TO JUST MAINTAIN THIS OR ANY CHANGES WE MAKE? WELL, OF COURSE WE CAN ALWAYS PUT AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA. 
          I MEAN, WHAT'S YOUR QUESTION? THE TIMING? I DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THE TIMING BECAUSE IT'S NEXT. 
          WELL FIRST OF ALL, THE COUNCIL AND ANYBODY CAN SEE THIS RIGHT NOW, IT'S POSTED ON THE WEB. 
          RIGHT? RIGHT. 
          SO IT HAS A MARKER THERE. 
          SECONDLY, I AGREE WITH YOUR POINT ABOUT LET'S SEE THE REAL PLAN AND THEN TRY TO BE CONVERGING A A NUMBER OF US, A LOT OF US HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR A YEAR AND A HALF. 
          AND SO I THINK SEEING THE PLAN REBUTTING OR MODIFYING, THERE'S SO MANY THINGS HERE THAT YOU PUT IN THAT I THINK THERE'S QUITE STRONG AGREEMENT, RIGHT? BUT I THINK IT WILL GET DOWN TO, THERE'S MANY THINGS WE HAVE AGREEMENT ON THE BIG FIVE THAT WE'VE CALLED IT ENERGY EFFICIENCY, DEMAND RESPONSE, LOCAL SOLAR BATTERIES, AND MORE TRANSMISSION. 
          I MEAN, THAT'S SET, WE'VE GOT A LOT OF POSITIVE MOMENTUM ON THAT, I THINK. 
          UM, BUT YOU MAY WANNA HAVE SOME GUARDRAILS BASED UPON HOW THE, THE PLAN COMES OUT AND IF THERE ARE FIRM ENOUGH GOALS, RIGHT? SO THERE COULD BE A REBUTTAL ON THAT. 
          AND THEN I, LET'S JUST BE BLUNT, I MEAN, THE STICKING POINT'S GONNA BE THE PEAKERS AND LET'S JUST SEGREGATE THAT OUT AND LOOK AT WHAT'S IN THE PLAN BECAUSE A LOT OF US ARE BEATING OUR HEADS AGAINST THE WALL TRYING TO FIND A WAY TO MAKE EVERYONE HAPPY ON THIS. 
          AND THAT'S GONNA BE THE STICKING POINT. 
          SO I'D, I'D LIKE US TO GO OVER TO WHATEVER EXTENT YOU WANT TO AND FURTHER EXPLAIN, UH, SORT OF CELEBRATE, BUT ALSO, UH, TALK ABOUT WHAT WE'VE GOT DIRECTIONAL ALIGNMENT THAT'S STRONG AND THEN IT'S OBVIOUS THE PEAKERS ARE SOMETHING THAT THE COUNCIL'S PROBABLY GONNA HAVE TO DEAL WITH. 
          YEAH, I GUESS I WOULD JUST SAY THERE THEY ARE HOPING, I THINK THAT WE MAKE A RECOMMENDATION. 
          I GUESS MY HOPE WAS THAT IF WE MADE A RECOMMENDATION NOW THAT IT MIGHT ACTUALLY INFLUENCE THE DRAFTING OF THE PLAN. 
          BUT I, I THINK THAT MAYBE THE PLAN'S PRETTY MUCH DRAFTED ANYWAY. 
          I THINK THEY'VE GIVEN THAT THEY GAVE YOU INPUT ON THIS, THAT EVEN I WAS ONE DAY BEHIND ON, UM, AND EVENT ENGAGEMENT, I THINK THEY'RE FULLY AWARE OF WHAT THE DESIRE IS AND WHAT THE, THE SINGLE STICKING POINT, THE MAIN STICKING POINT WOULD BE. 
          YEAH. 
          CYRUS. 
          OH, WELL, I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, UM, WOULD THERE, UM, IF WE WERE TO NOT TAKE ACTION ON THIS, BUT LEAVE IT FOR THE NEXT MEETING, WOULD AUSTIN ENERGY, UM, DELIVER SOME SORT OF A RESPONSE ON THE, ON THE RESOLUTION BEFORE US? I'M JUST INTERESTED IN THE, THE PERSPECTIVE OF, OF, OF WHAT'S IN THIS, WHAT'S IN THIS RESOLUTION THAT IS A, THAT YOU WOULD SEE AS PROBLEMATIC. 
          SO THE WHOLE OBJECTIVE OF THIS MEETING IS TO GET YOUR FEEDBACK OF WHAT YOU WANNA SEE IN THE PLAN. 
          AND SO WE HAD THAT DIALOGUE EARLIER AND YOU'RE HAVING CONTINUED DIALOGUE NOW. 
          SO THAT'S ALL HELPING US. 
          [02:50:01]
THE PLAN IS NOT FULLY WRITTEN YET, THAT'S WHY YOU DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF YOU. 
          AND SO THE RESPONSE WE WOULD GIVE YOU WOULD BE IN THE FORM OF THE PLAN. 
          SO YOU WILL SEE THE PLAN AFTER WE TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION ALL OF THESE ITEMS. AND THEN YOU CAN MAKE YOUR RECOMMENDATION. 
          AND DURING THAT PROCESS, IF YOU SO CHOOSE TO PROPOSE AMENDMENTS TO THE PLAN, THEN YOU CAN GO THROUGH YOUR PROCEDURAL STEPS TO SEE IF YOU HAVE AGREEMENT ON THOSE. 
          THAT'S FAIR. 
          MY ULTIMATE GOAL IS TO GIVE COUNSEL DIRECTION IN ONE WAY. 
          SO, WELL, BUT, BUT IF WE BRING THIS, IF WE BRING, UH, THIS RESOLUTION BACK ON DECEMBER 2ND, IS THAT WHAT IT IS? UM, COULD WE GET A RESPONSE FROM STAFF ON THESE ITEMS OR ARE YOU SAYING THE ONLY RESPONSE WOULD BE IN THE PLAN ITSELF? YEAH, I, I, WELL, I GUESS MY, MY POINT IS THAT YOU'LL HAVE THE RESPONSE RIGHT IN THE FORM OF THE PLAN BEFORE THE, UH, SECOND YOU'LL HAVE, YOU'LL HAVE THE RESPONSE IN THE FORM OF THE PLAN ON THE 27TH. 
          AND I'D BE HAPPY TO DISCUSS ANY OF THE ITEMS WITH YOU ON THE SECOND THAT YOU'D LIKE TO DISCUSS, I THOUGHT WAS THE 27TH. 
          BUT I GUESS IF THERE IS A RESPONSE TO ANY OF THOSE BULLET ITEMS, YOU KNOW, OR CONCERNS OR, YOU KNOW, I WOULD BE HELPFUL, ESPECIALLY IF WE'RE GONNA GO BLOW BY BLOW, RIGHT? TO SEE IF WE'RE GONNA ADD ANY OF THOSE INTO THE PLAN ITSELF OR JUST PASS IT AS A RESOLUTION, WHICH IS A POSSIBILITY. 
          SO I WOULD THINK Y'ALL WOULD WANT US TO KNOW IF THERE WAS, UH, ANY INFORMATION YOU THOUGHT WOULD BE USEFUL IN CONSIDERING A RESOLUTION LIKE THAT. 
          JUST A SUGGESTION, WOULD RAUL, UM, MAYBE IT WOULD BE HELPFUL, LIKE, UH, CYRUS AND I DID MEET WITH LISA AND WENT OVER THIS RESOLUTION. 
          SO THERE WERE, THERE WERE A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT. 
          UM, I MEAN, DAVE'S, RIGHT, LIKE FUNDAMENTALLY THE, YOU KNOW, STICKING POINT IS WITH ADDING NATURAL GAS GENERATION, UM, WHICH INCREASES BOTH GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AND THE LOCAL AIR POLLUTION. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S JUST KIND OF, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THERE'S NOT REALLY A WAY AROUND THAT. 
          UM, SO WE JUST KIND OF HAVE TO DECIDE WHERE WE STAND. 
          UM, THERE WAS ALSO, UM, CONCERN AROUND HAVING INTERIM GOALS AND, UM, LANGUAGE ABOUT, AND, AND I DID ADJUST THE LANGUAGE IN HERE IN RESPONSE. 
          UM, IT HAS KIND OF SAID YEAR OVER YEAR REDUCTIONS AROUND THE, UM, LIKE THE NOX EMISSIONS AS WELL AS THE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. 
          UM, THEIR CONCERN WAS KIND OF LIKE WHAT HAPPENED THIS YEAR, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, WEATHER CONDITIONS OR WHATEVER. 
          IT COULD BE SOMETHING ELSE THAT MAKES THEM, YOU KNOW, HAVE A POOR PERFORMANCE WHEN IT COMES TO MAYBE MEETING, UM, THOSE GOALS IN A YEAR, BUT THEN THE NEXT YEAR MIGHT GO BACK UP. 
          UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, I DID TRY TO ADJUST HERE JUST TO SAY WITH REDUCTIONS BETWEEN, SO THAT IF YOU HAVE A BAD YEAR, IT'S NOT LIKE, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT THE END OF THE WORLD, ALTHOUGH, AGAIN, LIKE THERE'S NO FINANCIAL PENALTIES OR ANYTHING FOR ANY OF THIS. 
          IT'S, IT'S GOALS. 
          UM, BUT THAT WAS, THAT WAS SOMETHING WE TALKED ABOUT. 
          UM, I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER, LISA, WERE THERE OTHER SIGNIFICANT ISSUES? UM, CERTAINLY IN, UH, SO FIRST AND FOREMOST, I, I, I DON'T WANNA BRING TWO DIFFERENT PLANS, IF YOU WILL, TO CITY COUNCIL. 
          SO THAT'S MY FIRST IS AN OVERARCHING CONCERN WITH THE IDEA OF A RESOLUTION THAT MAY NOT ULTIMATELY, I'D RATHER YOU VOTE ON YOUR RECOMMENDATION ON THE PLAN, BUT SPECIFICALLY, UM, AND I DID SAY THAT WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO TALK ABOUT THEM AS WELL. 
          UM, THE, UH, NUMBER ONE CHANGES, UH, CARBON FREE, UH, BY 2035 TO ZERO GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ENTIRELY. 
          UM, AND IT'S NOT THAT I WANT ANY GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS IN 2025, BUT IT DOES CHANGE THE GOAL. 
          UM, AND SO, UH, THAT IS, THAT'S, THAT'S CONSIDERABLE. 
          CAN YOU ELABORATE ON THAT? I, I DIDN'T ACTUALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT EMISSIONS YOU'RE, YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THERE. 
          WELL, I WAS TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, EMISSIONS THERE, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF CONVERSATION, UM, WITH THE COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDERS AND WHATNOT ABOUT HOW DO YOU GO BEYOND CARBON, AND SOMETIMES IT'S LIKE, CAN YOU JUST GO TO EMISSIONS FREE ENTIRELY? AND SO, UM, WHAT I WANNA TALK ABOUT IS MAKING SURE THAT 
          [02:55:01]
WE, UM, MAKE SURE THAT WE, UH, YES, THERE ARE TRADE OFFS ASSOCIATED WITH ALL THE DIFFERENT EMISSIONS, AND THERE ARE DIFFERENT CONTROLS THAT YOU CAN PUT IN PLACE, BUT I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, THAT WE'RE NOT MOVING, UH, THE GOALPOST HERE. 
          UM, YOU'RE, GO AHEAD. 
          I MEAN, COME ON, . 
          OKAY. 
          UM, THIS WHOLE THING IS ABOUT MOVING THE GOALPOST. 
          I MEAN, UH, BUT ANYWAY, I, I GUESS MY QUESTION WAS MORE WHAT IS THE SCENARIO IN WHICH YOU HAVE ZERO CARBON EMISSIONS, BUT YOU STILL HAVE OTHER GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS? I, I, I THINK THAT, THAT THOSE SCENARIOS, THE IMPORTANT PART IS MAKING SURE THAT WE ALL AGREE AND WE KNOW WHAT THE CLEAN ENERGY GOALS ARE. 
          AND SO I, I WANNA BE CLEAR ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AS A WHOLE, WHICH IS WHAT'S IN THE OBJECTIVES THAT WE CAME UP WITH THE COMMUNITY, UM, OR, AND, AND ARE WE KEEPING TRUE TO OUR CARBON FREE BY 2035 GOAL? SO, OKAY, WELL, I, I THINK THIS DOES KEEP TRUE TO THAT. 
          I MEAN, THIS IS A CLIMATE PROTECTION PLAN AND LITERALLY EVERY CLIMATE PROTECTION PLAN I'VE EVER LOOKED AT TREATS, EVEN IF IT SPEAKS ABOUT CARBON EMISSIONS, IT IS SPEAKING TO CARBON EQUIVALENT AND DOES INCLUDE OTHER GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. 
          SO I DON'T THINK IT'S CHANGING THE INTENT. 
          AND I, UM, I DON'T SEE THE SCENARIO WHERE YOU'RE MEETING ALL OF, UH, WHERE YOU'RE, WHERE YOU'RE MEETING THESE GOALS LISTED HERE, AND YOU STILL HAVE SOME OTHER GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. 
          SO I'M STILL STRUGGLING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT SCENARIO IS. 
          , I, UM, I WANNA JUMP TO NUMBER FIVE. 
          YOU TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THESE INCREASING GOALS. 
          SO I DON'T BELIEVE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS A LITTLE BIT, BUT I DON'T NECESSARILY THINK THAT THE PATH TO OUR CLEAN ENERGY GOALS WILL NECESSARILY BE LINEAR. 
          UM, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT ARE OUTSIDE OF OUR CONTROL, AND I THINK THAT WE'LL ULTIMATELY HAVE STEP CHANGES WHEN MAJOR THINGS HAPPEN, LIKE WHEN WE EXIT COAL OR WHEN TECHNOLOGY EVOLVES IN CERTAIN WAYS TO ALLOW US TO DO THINGS DIFFERENTLY. 
          UM, THIS NUMBER FIVE SEEMS TO BE PART OF THE GOAL IS TO BE AS FLEXIBLE AS WE CAN TO ADAPT TO CHANGING CONDITIONS. 
          THIS ONE CONTINUES TO SAY THAT YOU NEED TO MEET IT WITH RENEWABLE ENERGY. 
          AND SO THAT STARTS TO THEN PRECLUDE OTHER, UH, CARBON FREE TECHNOLOGIES LIKE NUCLEAR, UM, OR, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER ELSE MIGHT COME OUT. 
          SO I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT BEING TOO PRESCRIPTIVE ABOUT SAYING THE ONLY WAY TO SOLVE THIS IS THROUGH RENEWABLE ENERGY THAT'S SOMEWHAT GOT US INTO THE PLACE WHERE WE ARE WHEN WE SHUT DOWN OUR OLD UNITS, WE THOUGHT WE COULD JUST IMPORT RENEWABLE ENERGY. 
          AND THAT TURNED OUT TO NOT WORK OUT FOR US AND PUT US IN THE CURRENT STATE OF RELIABILITY AND AFFORDABILITY RISK. 
          I THINK THERE ARE ALSO, UM, WE TEND TO USE TERMS NOW, WE DON'T TALK ABOUT FAYETTE SHUTTING DOWN AS MUCH AS WE TALK ABOUT EXITING COAL EMISSIONS. 
          WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE GETTING RID OF THE COAL EMISSIONS ENTIRELY, UM, BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY THE LARGEST BARRIER RIGHT NOW TOWARDS REACHING OUR CLEAN ENERGY GOALS. 
          AND SO, UM, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THERE'S PROBABLY A NUMBER OF WAYS TO TRY TO MAKE THAT A VERY CLEAN, UM, AND EMISSIONS FREE, CARBON FREE. 
          UM, BUT I DON'T WANNA PRECLUDE ANY OF THOSE PARTICULAR, UM, OUTCOMES. 
          AND THEN, UM, AND WE TALKED ABOUT THIS AT LENGTH, BUT THERE'S A LOT OF LANGUAGE IN HERE ABOUT AFFORDABILITY, AND WE'VE HAD SOME CONVERSATIONS DURING OFFICE HOURS, SO SOME OF Y'ALL MAY KNOW THIS, UM, BUT WE CERTAINLY SEEK LOW BILLS AND LOW RATES. 
          BUT SOME OF THE, UM, COMMENTS IN HERE START TO GET PRETTY SPECIFIC ABOUT HOW, UM, WE WOULD ACHIEVE A NEW AFFORDABILITY GOAL. 
          AND SO IF YOU WERE TO MAKE ANY RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL ABOUT AFFORDABILITY, I WOULD ASK THAT YOU ALLOW OUR STAFF TO DO SOME ANALYSIS ABOUT THE VARIOUS, YOU KNOW, UH, CONSEQUENCES AND, AND, AND OPPORTUNITIES AHEAD OF US, UM, AS OPPOSED TO KIND OF PREDEFINING WHAT YOU THINK THE OUTCOME WOULD BE. 
          UM, WE THINK THAT, UM, BILLS IS THE ONLY GOAL WITHOUT RATES, UM, COULD BECOME PROBLEMATIC IN THE FACE OF MORE AND MORE ELECTRIFICATION. 
          UM, BUT WE CERTAINLY LIKE TO LOOK AT BOTH BILLS AND RATES. 
          THEY'RE BOTH IMPORTANT ASPECTS TO CONSIDER. 
          UM, AND THEN WE REALLY JUST, WE, WE, I WANNA BE CLEAR, WE FULLY ACKNOWLEDGED THAT OUR EXISTING AFFORDABILITY GOAL IS, BECOMES A LITTLE BIT OF BARRIER IF YOU THINK OF IT AS A HARD AND FAST COMPONENT. 
          AND SO THAT'S NOT OUR INTENTION AT ALL. 
          SO WE WANT YOU TO, WE, WE, WE, WE UNDERSTAND THAT IN THE PAST WE'VE HEARD THINGS LIKE 5% IS RATE SHOCK, 2% TO 2%. 
          THAT WAS SET YEARS AGO WHEN THAT WAS ESSENTIALLY INFLATION 
          [03:00:01]
LOOKING VERY DIFFERENT THAN IT IS TODAY IS PROBABLY TOO LOW. 
          THERE'S PROBABLY SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE. 
          I THINK WE ALL HAVE COLLECTIVELY AGREED TO THAT. 
          I WOULD JUST BE CAREFUL ABOUT HOW PRESCRIPTIVE YOU GET IN WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO SUGGEST TO COUNCIL, BECAUSE I THINK ULTIMATELY AFFORDABILITY NEEDS TO BE HANDLED OUTSIDE, UM, AND TAKEN UP AS A SEPARATE PROCESS. 
          I MEAN, HONESTLY, YOU COULD JUST SAY WE RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL REEVALUATE THE AFFORDABILITY GOAL AND NOT GET INTO ALL THE SPECIFICS. 
          UM, OR MENTION HERE ARE SOME OF THE FACTORS YOU COULD LOOK AT VERSUS THE GOAL SHOULD INCLUDE. 
          I MEAN, PRETTY SURE WE SAID THAT IN THE LAST PLAN AND YEAH. 
          HAVE WE RECEIVED, AND HERE WE ARE. 
          YEAH, ANY PRESENTATION OR ANYTHING ABOUT REEVALUATING IT. 
          AND THEN, UM, I WOULD RECOMMEND, UH, YOU HAVE THAT THIS, THIS PROCESS, UH, BE CONDUCTED EVERY TWO TO THREE YEARS. 
          WE KNOW HOW LONG, HOW MUCH TIME WE'VE PUT INTO THIS IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS. 
          I'M NOT SAYING THAT I DON'T THINK THAT WE NEED TO REVISIT THIS. 
          UM, CERTAINLY THERE IS A APPROPRIATE TIMEFRAME. 
          UM, I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHAT IT IS, BUT ONE OF THE WHOLE POINTS OF THE WORK THAT WE'RE DOING IS TO CREATE SOME FLEXIBILITY TO ADAPT TO CHANGING CONDITIONS. 
          SO I DON'T KNOW IF THIS FULL LEVEL OF PROCESS IS REQUIRED IN TWO YEARS. 
          SO THAT'S SOMETHING ELSE THAT I WOULD JUST WANT TO CONSIDER. 
          I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RIGHT NUMBER IS. 
          I WASN'T THE ONE THAT PUT, PUT THOSE NUMBERS IN THERE, BUT I WILL SAY I'D BE HAPPY TO ADD THAT THE PROCESS SHOULDN'T TAKE TWO YEARS. 
          AGREED. 
          AGREED. 
          SO I THINK THAT WE DON'T WANT THIS WHOLE IN-DEPTH PROCESS EVERY TWO OR THREE YEARS, BUT I THINK THAT FOR TECHNOLOGY CHECKPOINTS TO SEE THE TR TRL LEVELS, HOW THEY MAY HAVE CHANGED AND GET AN UPDATE ON WHAT RFPS, RF, QS YOU'VE HAD, AND, UH, THE, THE PROGRESS OF THE TECHNOLOGIES SOMETHING LIGHTER WEIGHT MM-HMM. 
           THAN THAT. 
          UM, SO I THINK THAT'S PART OF THE CRAFT RECRAFTING. 
          OKAY. 
          BUT NOT ANYTHING, BUT THERE WERE SOME EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES WHY THIS HAS TAKEN SO LONG. 
          THIS, THERE'S A LOT OF MANAGEMENT CHANGES AND DIFFERENT THINGS. 
          WELL, AND WE WERE DOING A 2030 UPDATE AND THEN YEAH, REALIZING WE NEEDED TO DO A FULL FLEDGED 2035 PLAN, RIGHT? A LOT OF COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT IN BRINGING PEOPLE UP TO SPEED, UM, IN A NUMBER OF WAYS. 
          UM, SO I MEAN, I THINK THE FACT IS, IS THERE'S A LOT OF, THERE'S A LOT OF ITEMS IN HERE, UM, THAT ULTIMATELY GET TO BE, YOU KNOW, FAIRLY COMPLEX AS WE TALK ABOUT IT, I'M NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT SURE, UM, YOU KNOW, WHAT EVERY LAST WORD MEANS. 
          AND, UM, BUT I HAVE, YOU KNOW, HEARD, WE HAVE ALL HEARD YOUR FEEDBACK AND YOUR DISCUSSION ABOUT IT. 
          AND SO WE'LL DEFINITELY TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION AS WE CONTINUE TO DRAFT THE PLAN. 
          I GUESS JUST SO THAT IT, I MEAN, I'M, I'M HEARING THE WILL OF THE GROUP IS TO TAKE THIS UP WITH THE PLAN. 
          I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO MAKE EDITS THAT REFLECT, YOU KNOW, WHAT THIS COMMISSION WOULD FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH. 
          UM, CYRUS ON NUMBER FIVE, YOU ASKED ABOUT END OF 2035, SO JUST EDITED THAT. 
          JOSHUA, YOU WERE ASKING ABOUT NUMBER EIGHT AND WHAT TO DO WITH THE PEAKER UNITS, SO I CAN TAKE A, TAKE A TRY AT TRYING TO ADD SOME LANGUAGE AROUND THAT. 
          YEAH, I MEAN, I GUESS I'M JUST TRYING TO LIKE, DEPENDING ON WHAT, YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON HOW IT'S INTERPRETED, IT COULD BE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE WITH LIKE ANY OF THE OTHER PORTFOLIO, MEANING IT COULD BE NOT COMPATIBLE WITH SOME OF THE OTHER PORTFOLIOS. 
          I WOULD JUST LIKE TO KNOW IF THAT'S THE CASE. 
          LIKE TO BE RELATIVELY CLEAR THAT IF WE, THAT, IF THAT, IF WE WERE TO ADOPT THIS, THAT WE'D BASICALLY BE SAYING LIKE, IF WE'RE ADOPTED AS IS THAT WE'D BASICALLY BE SAYING LIKE, NO TO ANYTHING THAT HAS NEW PEAKERS. 
          I WOULD JUST LIKE TO KNOW IF THAT'S HOW IT WOULD COME ACROSS OR THE INTENT OF IT WOULD BE. 
          SO JUST MAKE IT THAT INTENT. 
          THAT'S THE INTENT. 
          THAT IS THE INTENT. 
          OKAY. 
          JUST LET'S JUST MAKE IT, CAN WE JUST MAKE THAT EXTREMELY EXPLICIT? WE COULD ALSO JUST SAY THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          I WOULD, YOU KNOW, I THINK I STARTED DRAFTING THIS WAY, AND I KNOW Y'ALL ADDED SOME OF THESE NUMBERS IN HERE TOO, BUT IT WAS KIND OF HEARING THAT AE WANTED TO MOVE IN THIS DIRECTION OF HAVING LIKE, OVERARCHING GOALS. 
          AND SO TRYING TO WRITE IT IN THAT MANNER. 
          PERSONALLY, I LIKE THE WAY THE EXISTING PLAN IS, WHEREAS THAT'S KIND OF BENCHMARKS. 
          IT JUST SEEMS CLEAR, THIS GETS CONVOLUTED. 
          UM, LIKE HOW DO YOU KNOW SETTING OVERARCHING GOALS THAT THEN GET TO THE SAME POINT OF, YOU KNOW, TRANSITIONING 
          [03:05:01]
AWAY FROM FOSSIL FUELS INSTEAD OF INVESTING IN THEM MORE. 
          BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARILY EIGHT THAT IS EIGHT IS KIND OF WHAT TO DO WITH THE EXISTING FLEET. 
          I THINK IT'S MORE, AGAIN, THE NUMBER ONE AND NUMBER FIVE THAT WOULD ESSENTIALLY GET AT SAY DON'T BUILD MORE FOSSIL FUEL GENERATION OR MORE GENERATION OF ANYTHING THAT'S COMBUSTION HERE. 
          BECAUSE UNLESS YOU, AGAIN, UNLESS YOU'RE SWAPPING OUT EXISTING UNITS FOR THOSE NEW UNITS, YOU'RE GONNA INCREASE EMISSIONS. 
          AND THAT'S WHAT THE MODEL IN SHOWS. 
          OKAY. 
          AND I JUST WANNA CLARIFY THAT. 
          MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO INCORPORATE THESE TOPICS INTO THE PLAN SO THAT IT IS A COMPREHENSIVE DOCUMENT THAT ADDRESSES MUTUAL GOALS OF RELIABILITY, AFFORDABILITY, AND SUSTAINABILITY INSTEAD OF A SEPARATE PARALLEL RESOLUTION. 
          WELL, I THINK WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GET IS A PLAN THAT THEN WE CAN MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS ON. 
          SO WE'RE STILL GONNA HAVE TO, MAYBE IT CAN LOOK SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT THAN THIS, BUT IT'S, WE'RE STILL GONNA, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO WRITE OUR OWN DOCUMENT, I GUESS IS WHAT, SO WE CAN'T AMEND, SO WE'LL GET A DRAFT PLAN THAT WE THEN REVIEW AND CONSIDER. 
          AND WE CAN'T JUST MAKE AMENDMENTS TO THAT TOPIC. 
          I MEAN, I DOUBT WE'RE GONNA GET IT IN A WORD DOC. 
          ARE WE THE, I MEAN, NO, YOU'RE NOT JUST IN THE MEETING, IN THE MEETINGS. 
          I, I DON'T THINK WE'RE GONNA, IS IT A, IS IT A WORD DOCUMENT? IT ISN'T, IS IT A, IT'S NOT A WORD DOCUMENT. 
          IT'S A A, YOU KNOW, UM, IT'S DONE IN LIKE INDESIGN OR SOMETHING. 
          WHAT'S IS THAT RIGHT? INDESIGN. 
          IT'S DONE IN DESIGN. 
          IT'S GOT WORDS ON IT THOUGH. 
          IT HAS WORDS ON IT. 
          YEAH, IT ABSOLUTELY HAS. 
          AS WE'RE DELIBERATING, WE COULD SAY. 
          YEAH. 
          YES. 
          I MEAN, AS WE'RE DELIBERATING, WE COULD SAY WE COULD, SOMEONE COULD MOVE TO AMEND YES. 
          SOME TEXT. 
          ABSOLUTELY. 
          PLAN. 
          AND THEN YES. 
          OKAY. 
          THE RECOMMENDED PLAN WOULD REFLECT THOSE AMENDMENTS. 
          THAT'S RIGHT. 
          I GUESS I'M SAYING WE'RE STILL GONNA HAVE TO WRITE THAT DOWN AND DOCUMENT. 
          WELL, WE MAY HAVE TO HAVE A RESOLUTION THAT SAYS WE ADOPT THE PLAN WITH THE FOLLOWING MODIFICATION, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY WE'LL HAVE ONE RECOMMENDATION AND NOT YEAH. 
          A RECOMMENDED PLAN AND THE RESOLUTION HOPE IN THE BEST OF ALL WORLDS. 
          YEAH, WE CAN GET THERE. 
          I LIKE THAT APPROACH. 
          YOU KNOW, I THINK IT, IT'S BEEN DIFFICULT 'CAUSE WE, EVEN THOUGH WE'VE BEEN IN THIS FOR SO LONG, THERE'S NO PLAN, RIGHT? WHAT WE SEE, WHAT IS GOING TO BE IN THE PLAN. 
          AND SO THIS WAS AN ATTEMPT TO RESPOND TO WHAT WE SEE IS GOING TO BE IN THE PLAN WITHOUT HAVING AN ACTUAL PLAN. 
          AND I THINK THERE'S BEEN VALUABLE DISCUSSION. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, A LOT OF FEEDBACK OBVIOUSLY. 
          AND HOPEFULLY THAT WILL BE REFLECTED IN THE DRAFTING OF THE PLAN, AND IF NOT AS A BODY, WE CAN AMEND OUR RECOMMENDATION. 
          YEAH. 
          SO GETTING BACK TO A PROCESS QUESTION, UM, WE'RE NOT GONNA SEE THE, IT'S THANKS. 
          RIGHT? NEXT WEEK IS THIS NEXT WEEK THE 27TH? IS THAT NEXT WEEK? IT IS NEXT WEEK. 
          OKAY. 
          IT'S WEDNESDAY, I THINK. 
          WEDNESDAY, RIGHT? YEAH, IT'S WEDNESDAY, RIGHT BEFORE THANKSGIVING DAY BEFORE. 
          THERE'S NOT GONNA BE TIME TO POST SOMETHING NEW. 
          DO YOU GUYS WORK ON FRIDAY? LIKE THAT'S WHAT I'M THINKING. 
          YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO POST THE THINGS FOR THE EUC MEETING ON THAT WEDNESDAY OR, YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          SO HOW DO WE GET, SO WHAT I'M SAYING IS MAYBE WE COULD JUST REPOST THIS. 
          YEAH, I THINK WE NEED TO ON WEDNESDAY AS IS AND WE CAN ALWAYS, AND WE CAN DO NOTHING WITH IT OR, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? JUST THERE. 
          OR WE CAN AMEND IT. 
          SO IT'S BASICALLY A RECOMMENDATION ON THE PLAN. 
          YEAH, YOU'RE RIGHT. 
          WE'VE GOT, THAT'S WHAT I WAS SAYING, WE'VE GOTTA, THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET AT IS THE TIMING OF IT. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, YEAH, I THINK THE, UM, YES, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF A GAP IN THE TIMING THERE. 
          SO YOU COULD REPOST THIS RESOLUTION AS IS, OR YOU COULD JUST WORK ON AMENDING THE PLAN. 
          AND ONCE YOU HAVE THE PLAN, YOU CAN WRITE AMENDMENTS OVER THE WEEKEND AND BRING THEM TO THE, AND JUST BRING THEM THE MONDAY MEETING AS INDIVIDUALS YOU, BUT OVER THANKSGIVING, THE PLAN WILL BE POSTED. 
          WE'RE ALL WORKING , LIKE WE'RE ALL TRYING TO GET THIS DONE. 
          I THINK LET'S, I MEAN, WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST GIVEN THIS CONVERSATION AND LIKE THE DESIRE FOR 
          [03:10:01]
CLARITY, UM, I CAN MAKE A FEW EDITS THAT WILL, I THINK IMPROVE THE CLARITY OF THE INTENT AND WE CAN POST IT. 
          AND THEN IF WE CHOOSE TO DO NOTHING WITH IT AND JUST DO SOMETHING ON THE PLAN, THEN GREAT. 
          IF WE FIND THAT TO BE CHALLENGING ON THE FLY, THEN WE HAVE THIS AS AN OPTION. 
          OKAY. 
          AND YOU'RE SAYING DO THAT RIGHT NOW OR WE COULD, I, I MEAN, SO FOR EXAMPLE, LIKE THERE IS ALSO AN EXISTING COMMITMENT IN THE PLAN TO NOT BUILD ANY MORE FOSSIL FUEL GENERATION. 
          I THINK THAT ACTUALLY JUST SAYING THAT IS ONE OF THESE ITEMS WILL CLARIFY THE INTENT AND THEN THE REST OF THIS IS ABOUT REDUCING EMISSIONS FROM EXISTING. 
          'CAUSE THAT IS THE INTENT. 
          RIGHT. 
          SO, UM, AND THEN I THINK I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA TRY TO LIKE WORK ON SOME WORDS TO ADDRESS THE EXISTING PEAKERS AND LIKE WHAT TO DO IF THOSE NEED TO STICK AROUND. 
          UM, AND TRY TO MAKE THAT FLEXIBLE TOO. 
          SO IT'S NOT LIKE JUST DURING DATA CAPTURE AT THAT WE NEED TO GO TO AUSTIN ENERGY THIS WEEK BASICALLY. 
          YEAH, YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN WE CAN CHOOSE TO ACT ON IT OR NOT TAG ON IT OR, BUT IT'S THERE. 
          YEP. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT SOUNDS LIKE A PLAN. 
           OKAY. 
          FOR US. 
          OKAY, SO, OKAY. 
          IT'S GOING, GOING TO WORK ON THAT. 
          IT'LL BE POSTED FOR THE DECEMBER 2ND EUC MEETING. 
          WE'LL GET ON THE 27TH, THE PLAN FROM AE AND THEN WE'LL REBUT WHETHER THERE'S ANY ISSUES, RIGHT? CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          SO IS THERE ANY MORE DISCUSSION ON THIS ONLINE IO, JONATHAN? OKAY. 
          WELL, WITH THAT I THINK WE'LL ADJOURN. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. 
          AND THAT'S OUR ONLY MEETING IN DECEMBER, RIGHT? WE'RE NOT, YEAH, IT'S ACTUALLY SPECIAL. 
          WE DON'T USUALLY HAVE A OH, YOU DIDN'T GET THE CHRISTMAS INVITE? NO.
* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.