PGRR145 (Planning Guide Revision Request 145) and NPRR1325 (Nodal Protocol Revision Request 1325) are the two governance instruments that establish ERCOT's 'Batch Zero' large-load interconnection process — PGRR145 sets the planning-guide framework and NPRR1325 operationalizes the Provisional Controllable Load Resource (PCLR) protocol that lets large loads commit to partial-firm + curtailable service in exchange for faster Batch Zero approval. Both were filed March 4, 2026; both are now confirmed cleared at the subcommittee level with Urgent status. Yesterday's newsletter confirmed NPRR1325 cleared PRS on May 6 (also Urgent, also 5/2-amended). Today's update: PGRR145 cleared ROS on May 7 with the same posture (Urgent, recommended approval as 5/2-amended, forwarded to TAC). The PGRR145 issue page activity log dated 5/7/2026 reads in full: 'PGRR145 received a recommendation for approval as amended by the 5/2/26 ERCOT comments. PGRR145 will be forwarded to TAC.' The TAC posture is now exactly identical for both items — both carry Urgent flag, both reference the same 5/2 ERCOT comment package, both await TAC May 19-20. The original ERCOT-published timeline (PRS May 6 → ROS May 7 → TAC May 19-20 → Board June 1 → effective July 10) is now actively-tracking. Source: ERCOT NPRR1325 and PGRR145 issue pages (mktrules/issues/{NPRR1325, PGRR145}).
Primary source · ERCOT NPRR1325 + PGRR145 issue pages ↗
Why it matters
Three updates. (1) Confirmation of yesterday's pending verification #1 and #2 — both ERCOT companion items have now cleared the subcommittee level on the same Urgent track, and the May 19-20 TAC vote is structurally locked rather than soft-scheduled. The submission-validator's PCLR / PCLR-companion-planning-guide modules need to be feature-complete against the 5/2-amended versions of *both* documents (not just NPRR1325's protocol language) by close-of-business May 18. The PGRR145 5/2 amendments are likely procedural-overlap with NPRR1325's amendments — same comment package, written by the same ERCOT staff — but the planning-guide language has separate definitions for 'Eligible Large Load,' 'Batch Zero Application Window,' and the milestone-fee escalation schedule that the protocol-side NPRR doesn't contain. The Layer-5 product needs to parse both. (2) The 'Urgent on both sides' posture is procedurally aggressive in a way that Cliff's customers should plan for. ERCOT's standard governance cycle for a paired NPRR+PGRR runs 4-6 months from filing to effective date; the Batch Zero pair is on track for ~4 months (March 4 filing → July 10 effective) which is the fast end of the cycle. The Urgent-on-both-sides pattern means stakeholder objection at TAC has a structurally higher bar — TAC by ERCOT bylaw is supposed to defer to PRS and ROS recommendations on Urgent items unless there's a reliability-implication objection that wasn't surfaced at subcommittee. The realistic risk profile for May 19-20: TAC approves both as recommended (highest probability), TAC remands one item back to subcommittee for additional comment (lower probability — would push effective date 1-2 months), or TAC rejects (very low probability given Urgent status on both sides). Cliff's customers underwriting Texas sites with Q3-Q4 2026 in-service dates can now plan against a real PCLR effective date of July 10, 2026 with reasonably high confidence. (3) The 5/2-amendment comment package is the new authoritative source for PCLR rules — pull the file overnight from ERCOT's issue-page comment archive and diff against the original 3/4 filing. Specific items to surface: (a) Provisional Curtailment Capacity (PCC) calculation method — original filing used historic-15-min-peak; 5/2 amendments may have moved this to projected-load-curve or a 12-month-rolling-90th-percentile method. (b) Curtailment-trigger-event definition — original filing tied PCLR curtailment to Energy Emergency Alert (EEA) Level 1; 5/2 amendments may have moved this to EEA Level 2 (later trigger, more usage allowed before curtailment), which is what most large-load customers want. (c) The milestone-fee schedule — original filing had application-stage / readiness-stage / commercial-operation-stage fee milestones; 5/2 amendments may have softened the readiness-stage thresholds. The submission-validator's PCLR economics calculator needs to be re-run against whichever of these three (or other) changes the 5/2 package contains, before May 18.
Related filings
T+3 PJM bid close Jul 7 / T+3 Lakeland FL first reading Jul 6 9AM / T-6 ERCOT Form W Jul 10 / T+11 PJM auction results Jul 14 / T+16 Lakeland FL final vote Jul 20 / T+23 MD FERC comment deadline Jul 27 / Prince George's MD 2-year moratorium vote queued next week / NY A11560 not delivered to Hochul / 10-day clock not started / 6 deadline windows 24 days
Plain-English rollup of what didn't change over the July 4 weekend and what's coming next week. **ERCOT Batch Zero Form W Part A — T-6 to Thursday July 10.** No change since Thursday. The Interconnecting Large Load Entity (data center operator) must...
Oracle sued Wisconsin PSC Jun 19 Ozaukee County / challenging April tariff rule / $100M/year financial security / very large customer >20 MW sub-A credit / Oracle BBB / Port Washington $15B 672 acres 1 GW 4 buildings We Energies / statutory-authority + discrimination + due-process theories / parallel administrative reconsideration / first hyperscaler-vs-PSC ratepayer-protection lawsuit / template for VA SCC MD FERC IL DCIP TX SB6 / AWS BBB+ adjacent risk / expected 6-12 months to ruling
Plain-English background on why this lawsuit matters more than a single facility dispute. Multiple states have enacted or are enacting 'ratepayer protection' rules for hyperscaler-scale customers in 2025-2026: Virginia's SCC rate class (approved Nov 2025,...
T-7 ERCOT ILLE Form W Jul 10 / T-21 Form W step 2 Jul 24 / PJM 2028-29 auction closes Jul 7 / results Jul 14 / price band $175-325 MW-day / 13-state governor pre-negotiated band / MD FERC ratepayer complaint comment deadline Jul 27 extended / NY A11560 not delivered to Hochul / 10-day clock not started / passive enactment plausible / 4 deadline-anchored windows next 24 days
Plain-English background on why the four operational-track deadlines all matter this month. Each of these deadlines drives a specific action by developers, hyperscalers, or state parties, and each represents a concrete moment where Cliff can produce a...
T-8 to Jul 10 ERCOT ILLE Form W deadline / Form W Part A now posted Large Load Integration page / notarized to TSP DSP / miss = 438000 MW proposed queue 89% data centers 3-5 years slower / Jul 24 TSP DSP to ERCOT step 2 / Microsoft Fairwater Mount Pleasant WI fully operational Jun 23 / 3.3B first phase / Brad Smith world's most powerful supercomputer / MISO not PJM / low friction state routing / 550 FTE 10000 construction workers / capex not slowing on T+0 morning / state-vs-federal misalignment produces geographic sorting
Plain-English background on the operational track. Yesterday's newsletter covered the regulatory calendar (VA tax, IL DCIP freeze, FL SB 484, Trump EO 14318, PJM auction open, ERCOT Batch Zero deadlines, Abbott Texas memo). Today's operational read is about...