Plain-English framing: SB 6 is the Texas legislature's response to ERCOT receiving 225 new large-load interconnection requests in 2025 (vs. 152 total from 2022-2024) and tracking ~238.6 GW of large-load requests as of December 2025. The law says: any new load 75 MW or larger has to pay big non-refundable application fees, post substantial financial collateral, prove site control, and disclose related projects up front — the goal is to filter out speculative interconnection requests from real, financed projects. The PUCT's draft rule (16 TAC §25.194) is the implementing regulation that turns the statute into enforceable specifics: which fees, which collateral amounts, which disclosures, which timelines. The $50,000-$100,000 per MW non-refundable fee is the most economically significant number — for a 500 MW data center, that's $25M-$50M in non-refundable application costs just to start the interconnection process. The ERCOT Batch Zero PCLR framework (separate from SB 6) is the operational mechanism — the framework that lets a fast-track interconnection request access provisional load before all transmission upgrades are complete. Together, SB 6 financial gates + ERCOT Batch Zero fast track = the new Texas interconnection regime. Sources: Perkins Coie 'SB 6 Implementation Shaping Data Center Future in Texas'; Greenberg Traurig 'Texas Senate Bill 6 Update: What Data Centers and Large Load Customers Should Know About Proposed Interconnection Standards'; Bracewell 'Texas Senate Bill 6 Ushers in Major Overhaul of Large Load Interconnection and Grid Access Rules'; EPE Consulting 'New Pathway and Deadlines in ERCOT's Batch Zero: PCLR'; Seyfarth Shaw 'ERCOT's Batch Zero Proposal and What It Means for Large-Load Projects in Texas'.
Primary source · PUCT / Perkins Coie / Greenberg Traurig / Bracewell / EPE Consulting / Seyfarth Shaw ↗
Why it matters
Texas is the highest-velocity state for data center interconnection volume (238.6 GW in queue, 225 new requests in 2025), and SB 6 + the PUCT rule + ERCOT Batch Zero are the three layers that together define the cost and timeline of any new Texas data center. For Cliff's beachhead wedge — Layer 5 live-docket + interruptible-load — this is the central regulatory artifact and the single richest source of structured filing data in the next 12 months. PUCT's draft rule had a closed comment period (April 17), so the next inflection point is final rule adoption. Once final, every developer in the ERCOT queue has to comply, which generates a high volume of filings, financial security documents, and site control disclosures — all structured, all primary-source, all queryable. The non-refundable per-MW fee structure ($50,000-$100,000/MW) creates a clean economic discriminator: it filters speculative requests out of the queue, which means the surviving queue is much higher-quality information about real data center demand. Update strategy/ercot-pclr-batch-zero.md with the SB 6 rule status: comment period closed April 17, final rule pending, PUCT is the implementing regulator, and any Texas siting analysis post-rule-adoption needs an SB 6 financial-security column in addition to the existing ERCOT Batch Zero PCLR column.
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...