Print 🖨

The Backup Power Package Advisory Committee met today in their first meeting. An archive of the meeting can be found here.

 

This report is intended to give you an overview and highlight the various topics taken up. It is not a verbatim transcript of the discussions but is based upon what was audible or understandable to the observer.

 

Opening Comments

Thomas Gleeson, PUC Chair

  • Call to order the first meeting of the Backup Power Package Advisory Committee
  • Purpose of this committee is to recommend criteria to the PUC to use in making grant/loans under this program; found in PUC Rule 25.515
  • Will leave once the committee selects the presiding officer
  • House members Ana Hernandez and Jay Dean are also members of this committee, but were unable to attend today

 

Committee Members

  • Mays Middleton, Senate District 11
  • Michael Hull, Texas Division of Emergency Management – stepping in for Nim Kidd
  • Matthew Boms, Executive Director Texas Advanced Energy Alliance
  • Alison Silverstein, Independent Consultant
  • Nathan Johnson, Senate District 16
  • Kevin Knippa, Texas Health and Human Services Commission
  • Ivan Velasquez, Oncor

 

Presiding Officer Election

  • Senator Johnson is elected as the presiding officer of the Backup Power Package Advisory Committee
  • Gleeson – Have staff here to go over rules and other procedural matters

 

Legislation Overview

Dave Gordon, Executive Counsel PUC

  • Want to give an overview for the TEF
  • Have engaged a contractor to assist with the development and the implementation of these programs – Deloitte
  • Have two proposals out for publication and commentors have submitted comments on those; related to the in-ERCOT loan and the Completion Bonus Program
  • Anticipate coming forward with proposals for adoption soon
  • Have designated PUC project number 56176 as a repository for information/reports for the Backup Power Package program; this is owned by the committee
  • Silverstein – Have a notetaker from PUC staff on this meeting, what about those in the future?
    • Will need to discuss that – will depend on where/how the committee meets

 

Committee Business

  • Johnson – Have an ambitious timeline; deadline is October 1 to submit recommendations of the type of backup power projects that should be funded by our loans
  • Johnson – Recommend having regular meetings that can be virtual; let’s discuss what we want to achieve between now and the next meeting
  • Johnson – We should get to work on hard proposals right after March 5
  • Silverstein – Deloitte is the contractor, is their responsibility to submit the RFP for the technical contractor that will perform the work required to get this thing going?
    • Gordon – Yes
  • Silverstein – Can you or Deloitte give us an idea of when the RFP will be ready/filed? Can the committee weigh in for the RFP, what are other related deadlines
    • Gordon – Have engaged Deloitte, do not have timelines right now; have spoken with them and they will confer with the committee on how they should prepare
  • Silverstein – Can we get that going
    • Gordon – Deloitte representatives are here listening to this conversation
  • Johnson – In all our best interests to get going; are responsible for recommendations of types of projects and the procedures for applying
  • Johnson – Each should keep in mind what needs to happen from your perspective; would like to follow up with committee members in two weeks
  • Johnson – Recommend us meeting next in four weeks
  • Silverstein – Loans and grants should not be considered as separate; should have a grant for the first size tier and then you borrow at a discount rate above that; need to be flexible
  • Johnson – I agree; may be some that need over and above a grant
  • Velasquez – Will be important to establish criteria for the types of facilities eligible; want to start thinking about what types of critical facilities/locations
  • Velasquez – Then we need to think about interconnection and impacts of that to ensure locations can be interconnected quickly
  • Johnosn – Have a list of facilities we were considering when this legislation was drafted, will share with committee soon
  • Middleton – in 87(R) we redid mapping of critical circuits, any way we can use that to determine which do/do not have backup generation
  • Middleton – Will need TDEM’s feedback from the county emergency managers on what they saw/need
  • Johnson – Or could be a fuel supply –
  • Middleton – Or there be propane issues –
  • Johnson – Critical mapping focused on industrial, this is about community facilities if there is an outage
  • Silverstein – Is about supporting local health and safety – not industrial; hospitals, rural gas stations –
  • Johnson – Assisted living facilities, water purification systems –
  • Silverstein – Dialysis centers –
  • Middleton – Are private entities too; private water/systems should qualify for this
  • Silverstein – Agree
  • Johnson – Could be a philanthropic entity, private commercial small-scale health and safety; focused on health and safety
  • Silverstein – Not classic infrastructure
  • Silverstein – May want to add a provision in eligibility, it may not meet our criteria, but a local mayor could write in and say their community needs it
  • Johnson – Need to consider if these could be installed with existing facilities; in talks with a facility if they could daisy-chain new resources with existing

 

In Closing

  • Johnson – Will meet in four weeks, virtually

 

Adjourn