ERCOT Large Load Batch Study Process: Workshop #2 Summary

ERCOT Large Load Batch Study Process: Workshop #2 Summary

Author: Basit Mushtaq
Summary of ERCOT’s Large Load Batch Study Process: Workshop #2, held February 12, 2026

ERCOT held its second Batch Study Process for Large Load Interconnections Workshop to align stakeholders on governance, eligibility, and technical design following direction from the February 6 PUCT Open Meeting. The workshop focused on transitioning the batch concept into a formal, implementable framework and confirming the path toward ERCOT Board approval.

The discussion reflected a clear shift from conceptual design toward formal rulemaking and implementation. What follows is a structured overview of the most consequential themes from the workshop and what they signal for large load developers navigating ERCOT’s evolving interconnection landscape.

Workshop Purpose and Context

The workshop focused on four primary objectives:

  • Aligning stakeholders following the February 6, 2026 PUCT Open Meeting
  • Clarifying the structure and scope of the transitional Batch Zero process
  • Reviewing stakeholder feedback from:
    • The February 3 Batch Study Process for Large Load Interconnections Workshop
    • A stakeholder survey
    • Written public comments
  • Confirming governance steps and timing toward ERCOT Board approval

ERCOT emphasized that Batch Zero will serve as a transitional mechanism while a longer-term batch framework continues to develop.

PUCT Direction and Key Outcomes

The most significant outcome from the workshop was confirmation that Batch Zero will proceed through ERCOT’s standard stakeholder governance process, not through a Good Cause Exception.

As a result:

  • Formal Revision Requests (NPRR / PGRR) will be required
  • Standard committee and Board approvals will apply
  • Target ERCOT Board approval: June 2026
  • Target protocol effective date: August 1, 2026

ERCOT confirmed that the previously discussed Batch Zero A / Batch Zero B framework is no longer under consideration. Batch Zero will instead be structured as a single, transitional batch.

BYOG and CLR policy updates may proceed in parallel through separate Revision Requests. PGRR115 will remain in effect until Batch Zero is implemented.

Governance Path and Critical Milestones

ERCOT outlined the governance sequence required to maintain the current implementation schedule:

MilestoneTarget Date
ERCOT files Revision Request(s)March 4, 2026
ROS Vote (if applicable)May 7, 2026
PRS VoteMay 13, 2026
TAC VoteMay 20, 2026
ERCOT Board VoteJune 1, 2026

ERCOT emphasized that the May 2026 committee votes are critical to maintaining the proposed timeline.

Eligibility, Readiness, and Retroactivity

Snapshot Dates and Retroactivity: Stakeholders expressed concern that retroactive cutoff dates could create unintended eligibility outcomes driven by administrative timing rather than project readiness.

ERCOT confirmed that:

  • Batch Zero A/B date concepts are no longer applicable
  • Eligibility criteria will align with:
    • PUCT Project 58480 and Project 58481
    • Senate Bill 6

Submitted vs. Approved Milestones: Stakeholders noted that approval dates often reflect ERCOT or TSP backlog rather than developer readiness.

ERCOT indicated eligibility criteria will be re-evaluated in light of Commission guidance.

Eligibility Filter for Batch Zero: Stakeholders broadly supported readiness-based eligibility filters, including:

  • Financial security
  • Submission timing to the TSP
  • Operational readiness indicators
  • BYOG status

ERCOT stated that clear inclusion criteria will be defined in the forthcoming Revision Request.

CLR and BYOG Treatment

ERCOT clarified that Controllable Load Resources (CLR) and Bring-Your-Own-Generation (BYOG) are being addressed as separate policy tracks.

CLR

Planned elements under consideration include:

  • Allowing large loads to declare CLR intent
  • Binding obligations to remain dispatchable
  • Updates to SCED dispatch methodology
  • Transmission ultimately built to serve these loads
BYOG / Co-Located Generation

ERCOT intends to:

  • Define when load is considered “never seen” by the grid
  • Specify required study scenarios
  • Prevent energization until generation is operational

Stakeholders generally supported co-location and netting concepts but requested greater clarity and consistency.

Batch Study Technical Design

Stability Analysis: ERCOT noted that full dynamic stability studies typically require approximately five months. To preserve a semi-annual batch cadence, ERCOT proposed:

  • Stability screening during the batch study (e.g., P–V analysis)
  • Full dynamic stability studies after allocation for compliance purposes

ERCOT clarified that stability screening outcomes will not reduce allocated MW after batch results are issued.

Generation Additions to Planning Cases: ERCOT observed that many planning cases lack sufficient generation to serve modeled load. To address this, ERCOT plans to apply PGRR127 methodology to add generation for transmission security assessment purposes.

ERCOT emphasized that:

  • This approach is not a resource adequacy study
  • 89% of survey respondents supported this methodology

Load Allocation Methodology: ERCOT stated that load allocation will be based on each customer’s impact on system constraints, with the objective of maximizing load served within the batch.

Key allocation principles include:

  • Constraint-based allocation
  • Consistent application within each batch
  • Year-by-year allocation
  • Year 6 assuming full requested load

Approximately 81% of stakeholders supported maximizing load served, though some requested additional readiness-based prioritization.

Transmission Planning Alignment (RTP / RPG)

Stakeholders requested stronger integration between:

  • Batch Study results
  • Regional Planning Group (RPG) processes
  • Regional Transmission Plan (RTP)

ERCOT acknowledged the need for improved alignment and highlighted key objectives:

  • Avoiding serial delays
  • Aligning upgrade sequencing with energization timing
  • Providing clearer linkage between allocation and firm service

Survey results showed 59% support for linking load commissioning to upgrade completion. ERCOT indicated further clarification will be provided in future workshops.

Financial Commitments, Dropouts, and Reallocation

Under Senate Bill 6, the PUCT is evaluating cost allocation and financial commitment structures under Project 58481. For more on Project 58481, explore our article PUCT Project 58481: Requirements, Risks, and How to Prepare.

ERCOT is evaluating:

  • Deposit treatment and refundability
  • Reallocation of MW if projects withdraw
  • Appropriate grace periods before removal

Stakeholders generally supported tiered financial discipline and recycling unused capacity within the same batch where feasible.

Transparency and Communication

Stakeholders strongly requested improved transparency, including:

  • A centralized “single source of truth”
  • A self-serve dashboard or portal
  • Visibility into:
    • Study status
    • Allocation results
    • Transmission impacts
    • Milestones and restudy triggers

ERCOT confirmed development of a centralized portal. Survey results indicated that 94% of respondents prioritize standardized timelines, even over expanded transparency.

Summary Observations

The workshop demonstrated that ERCOT is transitioning from conceptual design to formal governance and implementation. Focus is now on finalizing Revision Request language, incorporating stakeholder feedback, and meeting the May 2026 approval milestones.

The direction is toward a predictable, ERCOT-led batch process with clearer eligibility gates, defined technical scope, and improved transparency.

To evaluate Batch Zero eligibility, CLR or BYOG implications, or transmission exposure for ERCOT large load projects, contact ZEG to discuss next steps.

Resources

ERCOT – Large Load Batch Study Workshop 02122026 v06

3. LL Stakeholder Comments Feb 2026 v2

3. LL Summary Survey and Public Comments 02122026